On 1/11/2016 10:09 AM, Warren Young wrote:
On Jan 11, 2016, at 7:14 AM, Stephan Beal <[email protected]>
wrote:
i just got an off-list chat question regarding fossil not switching
branches when a new one is created.
....
Is there a good argument against making “f branch new” behave like “f
ci --branch”?
I recall being rather confused by that difference once, and deciding at
the time that f ci --branch was less confusing. As a result, I've become
accustomed to not creating the branch before making the first changes
that will eventually be on it.
Obviously there’s the inertia of existing practice, but I wonder how
many people that would affect.
What use case exists where you *want* to create a new branch but not
switch to it immediately?
Back when we used SVN, we had the practice of pro-actively creating a
branch for bug fixes of each release, which came about from one of the
books or whitepapers on "best practices" with SVN at the time. Of
course, it made branching somewhat painful to use...
With fossil, I wait until I have a bug to fix that is more than a
one-liner and create the branch on the first checkin of the effort to
find and fix it, sometimes even after the first checkin.
--
Ross Berteig [email protected]
Cheshire Engineering Corp. http://www.CheshireEng.com/
_______________________________________________
fossil-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
