On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 10:05 AM, Jan Nijtmans <jan.nijtm...@gmail.com>wrote:

> I think it would be better if fossil didn't create the initial empty
> commit any more:
>     <http://fossil-scm.org/index.html/info/f2c8b4f375>
> That would avoid the confusion, and it works fine!
>
> Any objections merging this to trunk?
>

No objections, but some comments...

- libfossil has been using repos without an initial commit since last
summer. AFAIK there are no more open assertions related to that, but every
now and then i'll run into a case which expects an RID>0 and might (until
the first commit) see a 0. It can always be repaired when this happens, but
triggering it can be cumbersome to do (i.e. there might eventually be some
(now-invalid) assertions which eventually need to be patched for this).

- Whether or not it should default to having no initial empty commit is
debatable, but i can't argue strongly either way. i tend to think it should
do one by default, solely for historical compatibility, but OTOH it's not a
critical functionality (just an immediately-visible change for long-time
users).


-- 
----- stephan beal
http://wanderinghorse.net/home/stephan/
http://gplus.to/sgbeal
"Freedom is sloppy. But since tyranny's the only guaranteed byproduct of
those who insist on a perfect world, freedom will have to do." -- Bigby Wolf
_______________________________________________
fossil-users mailing list
fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users

Reply via email to