On Sun, Nov 1, 2015 at 2:14 AM, Stephan Beal <sgb...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 31, 2015 at 10:19 PM, Matt Welland <mattrwell...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> On Sat, Oct 31, 2015 at 1:47 PM, Stephan Beal <sgb...@googlemail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> On Sat, Oct 31, 2015 at 9:41 PM, Matt Welland <mattrwell...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> BTW, to some extent it is ok for fossil to be opinionated software that >>>> strives to dictate how to do your work. However take that model very far >>>> and you quickly alienate people. Given that perspective, why would fossil >>>> care if someone chooses to commit a symlink that points outside their repo? >>>> Give that user some credit, presumably he or she has a good reason for >>>> doing what they are doing. >>>> >>> >>> My problem is not the decision itself, but that, in terms of how fossil >>> should behave, it's a philosophical question. Those have no right/wrong >>> answer, and i dislike seeing software pretend to know the answer to such >>> questions. >>> >> >> Isn't that essentially confirming my point? Fossil merely stores the >> pointer. It need not waste time analysing the link to make a judgement call >> in any way. Just store it and move on. >> > > But if it only stores a pointer, and requires the user to reconstruct the > link, it's not terribly > As I tried to describe originally recreating the link is done automatically on Unix and on Windows a file containing the link pointer is created. > useful/friendly. The user would potentially have to replace fossil's > placeholder pseudosymlink file with a link of his own (which he could point > somewhere else than fossil thinks it "should" be). He might has well simply > have a "post-checkout" script which sets up his symlinks for him. To me, > that's the "proper"/"safest" way to handle symlinks in a repo (but i'm > willing to accept being in the minority on that point). > > The default behaviour I'd like to see is: >> >> fast: >> one readlink call, done! >> >> non-judgemental: >> the link can point wherever you want, fossil need not even check >> >> simple: >> store linkname as filename, result from readlink as file content, >> and a flag, i.e. symlink >> > > i'm not even sure what the default behaviour is, to be honest - i avoid > symlinks like the plague > I used to take this same stance but I've softened a little as I can see some genuine savings in time and effort where symlinks are used *judiciously* in an SCM context. > in all SCMs. When symlinks are disabled in fossil, they are (to the best > of my knowledge) stored as small files holding the resolved name of the > link (the "simple" option you list here). > That makes sense. I think fossil is very very close to doing exactly what I think is best in this regard but the default of following links has been very problematic in my experience. > > > -- > ----- stephan beal > http://wanderinghorse.net/home/stephan/ > http://gplus.to/sgbeal > "Freedom is sloppy. But since tyranny's the only guaranteed byproduct of > those who insist on a perfect world, freedom will have to do." -- Bigby Wolf > > _______________________________________________ > 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
