On Sat, Oct 31, 2015 at 1:47 PM, Stephan Beal <sgb...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 31, 2015 at 9:41 PM, Matt Welland <mattrwell...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> BTW, to some extent it is ok for fossil to be opinionated software that
>> strives to dictate how to do your work. However take that model very far
>> and you quickly alienate people. Given that perspective, why would fossil
>> care if someone chooses to commit a symlink that points outside their repo?
>> Give that user some credit, presumably he or she has a good reason for
>> doing what they are doing.
>>
>
> My problem is not the decision itself, but that, in terms of how fossil
> should behave, it's a philosophical question. Those have no right/wrong
> answer, and i dislike seeing software pretend to know the answer to such
> questions.
>
Isn't that essentially confirming my point? Fossil merely stores the
pointer. It need not waste time analysing the link to make a judgement call
in any way. Just store it and move on.
The default behaviour I'd like to see is:
fast:
one readlink call, done!
non-judgemental:
the link can point wherever you want, fossil need not even check
simple:
store linkname as filename, result from readlink as file content, and
a flag, i.e. symlink
>
> --
> ----- 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
>
>
_______________________________________________
fossil-users mailing list
fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
