On Mon, 17 Oct 2016 16:22:02 +0200, Marcus Harnisch wrote:
> My intention was to extend the concept of fileset from the user
> perspective. Providing a shell() directive, together with a [filesetalias]
> section in the config file, would enable users to encapsulate complex shell
> commands. This could be incredibly useful (would be for me anyway).
Yeah, shell() or [extdata] 'shell:' would be useful.
> In that case, a separate perm() directive would not even be necessary,
> although still useful. I was merely suggesting it since having only exec()
> seems arbitrarily incomplete from a user perspective.
> > Mercurial only cares for exec bit, so I don't think a generic perm()
> > is a good idea.
> But users might care.
Maybe. Another concern is perm() can't be generic because of Windows.
Mercurial mailing list