I think that both worlds can live together without any problem. - When doing "fossil mv A B"
* If A exists and B does not exist in file system, rename file A to B * If B exists and A does not exist in file system, do nothing * If either both exist or none exists, warn and stop - When doing "fossil rm A" * If A exists in file system, delete file A * if A does not exist in file system, do nothing RR 2015-03-04 18:24 GMT+01:00 paul <pault.eg...@gmail.com>: > On 03/03/15 22:27, j. van den hoff wrote: >> >> On Tue, 03 Mar 2015 22:22:40 +0100, Richard Hipp <d...@sqlite.org> wrote: >> >>> On 3/3/15, Warren Young <w...@etr-usa.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> Is there a good reason that “fossil mv” and “fossil rm” must be followed >>>> by >>>> OS-level mv and rm commands? I miss the behavior of Subversion which >>>> made >>>> these into a single step. >>> >>> >>> When I have suggested changing this, I got push back that the change >>> will break existing scripts. >> >> >> IIRC there was a lot of aversion at that time on the list along the line >> "fossil should not mess with my file system" which I personally found (and >> still find) essentially non-sequitur (since every `fossil up' does of course >> cause changes of the checkout content anyway). I'm also not sure what >> scripts would break and what the amount of work would be to fix those >> scripts (except removing the OS-level `mv' and `rm' actions if those were >> then executed by fossil itself) in comparison to getting an overall >> preferable behaviour (in my view, anyway). so, I would second the OP's >> request to make fossil behave essentially like svn (or hg) regarding `mv' >> and `rm'. I'm quite sure that would be the better behaviour in the >> overwhelming number of use cases (i.e. right now I would guess that in 99 >> out of 100 cases `fossil mv/rm' is followed by the corresponding os-level >> command, so ...). >> >> >>> >> >> > > I'm in the 1%. > > I prefer _not_ to use the command line. So if I want to move a file or > directory I usually do that with a file browser. Same for deleting. > > When I eventually come to doing a check-in, renamed/deleted files show up in > the missing tab of my fcommit GUI (*), and it's then, using the GUI, that I > tell fossil what I've done, and then I commit. > > If fossil mv also moves files on a filesystem, I'd be happy with that, so > long > as I can still use a file browser as I'm doing now. > > If I want to move a file on my hard drive, I think I should be able to do it > however I like, whether it's managed by a version control system or not. > > Regards, > > Paul > > (*) www.p-code.org/fcommit > > > _______________________________________________ > fossil-users mailing list > fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org > http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users _______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
