On Wed, 21 Dec 2011 20:31:21 +0100 Lluís Batlle i Rossell wrote: > I think I favour it. But then we have to decide what to do, if the > files had changes. "fossil revert" would not bring in the changes. > And I don't think the 'remove' or 'rename' operations should change > the undo buffer. Maybe the commands should require "-f" (force), if > there are changes.
The alternative, if we're going to make an option for the old behaviour (-XXX), is: $ fossil rm file.txt Cannot remove file file.txt, because it contains changes. Use `fossil rm -XXX` to stop tracking it or delete the file manually and try again. BTW, I didn't realize that the current behaviour is not to check for changes. This can be surprising. -- Dmitry Chestnykh http://www.codingrobots.com _______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
