Thus said Konstantin Khomoutov on Tue, 14 May 2013 07:40:41 +0400: > That is, it's backwards: you first do some work, then decide to commit > and decide this commit should start its own branch rather than > continuing the current one, so you create that new branch while > committing.
Not exactly backwards, but more of a convenience. If you suddenly discover that your changes should not yet go into the trunk, you can branch at the moment of the commit. This makes branching extremely easy to accomplish and less of a hassle to get the changes committed without breaking the rest of the sources. With other VCS you would have to go through a few more girations to get your newly changed files committed at the *right* location. However, it is also just as easy to pick a particular node in the DAG and branch from that too which is what the fossil branch command allows for. Andy -- TAI64 timestamp: 400000005191cef9 _______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
