On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 7:57 AM, Jan Nijtmans <jan.nijtm...@gmail.com> wrote:

> 2015-06-04 19:22 GMT+02:00 Joe Mistachkin:
> > First, I read the code involved very carefully and experimented with it
> here
> > locally.
> >
> > I wanted to agree with the change when I thought it was only impacting
> the
> > file names
> > that were shown to the user; however, it actually changes the arguments
> > passed to the
> > child process (i.e. which may be reconfigured by the user).  This is
> > technically a
> > breaking change because some tools may not be able to handle relative
> paths
> > (i.e. they
> > may not preserve the current directory correctly).
>
> Would you accept the patch if the use of relative paths was for
> win32 and cygwin only? External diff tools which handle relative paths
> the way you describe don't exist on win32/cygwin.
>

My idea was that an option be used to tell Fossil whether absolute or
relative file names are desired.

Also, the coworker in question has pointed out that several VCSs allow %
substitutions in the external command specifications. Would this be
feasible in Fossil? If so, this would even greater flexibility in
configuring external commands.
_______________________________________________
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