On 22 July 2014 21:18, Matt Welland <estifo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> We are using -nested very successfully to break a large area of related but
> mostly independent sub-areas into multiple fossils. I'm very happy with it.
>
> BTW, the whole reason why the modern SCM approach used by fossil, git etc.
> is so powerful is because the number of degrees of freedom were reduced by
> eliminating working on subsets of the file tree. If you add back in the
> ability to subdivide the file tree then you will have to add complexity to
> deal with branching and merging.
>
> Just my $0.02.

Alright. I saw your post
(http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/pipermail/fossil-users/2014-January/015012.html)
before I asked this question, btw. Did you start using --nested after
that moment in time?

I guess this sort of thing is personal, with added downside that it's
quite costly to "try it a bit" (I mean change from one big repo to
finer grained repos). We'll see; when frustration with one big repo
rises above some limit here, perhaps I try with small repos (and
perhaps back again :-)

Michai
_______________________________________________
fossil-users mailing list
fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users

Reply via email to