> On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 12:35 PM, Stephan Beal > <sgb...@googlemail.com>wrote: > >> On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 6:07 PM, <v...@lavabit.com> wrote: >> >>> I'd be very happy if I could just type: >>> >>> $ fossil co vim-7.3.154 >>> >>> I'd be even happier if I could just type: >>> >>> $ fossil co 154 >>> >> >> Not to sound too pessimistic, but... >> >> > Yeah. I can't quite put my finger on why, but something just feels wrong > about doing prefix matching against tag names. I wouldn't be that hard to > implement, actually (thanks to having SQLite with a GLOB operator as the > storage engine) but I'm questioning the wisdom of doing so. You're really > going to need to sell this proposal if you want it to get into the tree. > > > -- > D. Richard Hipp > d...@sqlite.org
Please don't take my initial question as lobby attempt, I rather asked to make sure that fossil already may provide such functionality which I could overlook when I was reading the docs. I completely agree with points raised in this thread, perhaps the most important one is that having such a feature wouldn't yield any significant benefits in all scenarios. When the development is linear and happens in the same branch for many commits, explicitly typing the full branch name once isn't a problem of course. In a scenario that involves switching between branches often, this could come handy, but it wouldn't be a problem for me to have a bash script named 154 that would do 'fossil co <thatwholebranchname>'. I just wanted to make sure I'm not missing a simple way of accomplishing it using only functionality that's already provided by fossil. _______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
