On 4/8/15, Andy Goth <andrew.m.g...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 4/8/2015 1:33 AM, bch wrote: >> I don't know if it's just me, or if there's a school of thought >> regarding this, but if this is a case of maintaining symlinks to publish >> as part of a distribution, I usually relegate their management to a >> script that will be part of a release generation process (with >> "repository != release" in mind). Are the problematic uses of symlinks >> different from that? > > I prefer your approach, however I did not get to pick in this instance > since I am trying to import an existing repository from ClearCase, > actually a snapshot, and it uses symlinks. Furthermore I think some of > the symlinks are used stupidly, but once again I don't get to pick.
1) It's nice to hear that others are like this 2) That you imported a (in our opinion) poorly-laid-out project is a good point to remember -- it's not always greenfield repositories that we work with. Thanks for the reminder. Cheers, > -- > Andy Goth | <andrew.m.goth/at/gmail/dot/com> > _______________________________________________ > fossil-users mailing list > fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org > http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users > _______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
