Lluis,
That's the same issue I noted in my email from Oct 25 (subject: mv +
revert irregularity) and it contains a short shell script demonstrating
the problem as you stated. It's not clear what the proper behavior is on
revert of this kind; I sent a reminder email regarding the issue
yesterday and if Richard/consensus can determine the desired behavior I'd
be willing to try to implement that behavior.
-KQ
On Mon, 14 Nov 2011 07:06:14 -0700, Lluís Batlle i Rossell
<vi...@viric.name> wrote:
(on fossil 1.20)
I've renamed a file, and modified the new one without any commit in the
middle,
and then 'fossil status' or 'fossil commit' do not show that it
*removes* the
old name.
Regarding a revert of that change in the working copy, it deletes the
'new
file', but does not restore the removed file. If then I do other
changes, and
commit them, it does not show anything special in the commit log
comments, but
it commits a silent *DELETE* for the first file I had moved.
I just had to recover a deleted file from history, because of that.
I hope someone understands the steps. :) If not, please tell me.
Regards,
Lluís.
_______________________________________________
fossil-users mailing list
fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
--
-KQ
_______________________________________________
fossil-users mailing list
fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
