Ron Wilson schrieb: > On Sat, May 21, 2011 at 4:29 PM, Gour-Gadadhara Dasa <g...@atmarama.net> > wrote: > >> On Sat, 21 May 2011 14:32:34 -0400 >> Richard Hipp <d...@sqlite.org> wrote: >> >>> Does anybody have any other suggestions on how to prevent the lose >>> of uncommitted work? >> >> Maybe not suggestion to prevent losing of uncommitted work, but I'm >> thinking about using 'stash' in such situation.
Perhaps Fossil could do this automatically. Whenever an 'update' would change any locally modified file, Fossil could stash the changes away first and inform the user. That way one could apply the stash to the updated working tree dealing with conflicts and such. After all went well the stash may be dropped manually. Then it would be much more difficult to lose local modifcation not committed so far. > Doing a fossil update should never delete uncommitted changed files. > Zed's post implies this happened. The 'stash first' should protect us here too :-) (...) Just my two cent ... Ciao, chi :-) _______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
