On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 2:20 PM, bch <brad.har...@gmail.com> wrote: > This is roughly what I'm doing, but it's not 100% accurate, and for > the case of 100s of files, still tedious. I guess the point is that > there's not any special secret method available with-in or outside > fossil (outside of trying to tease-out the "root" of a filename and > pair-up ea. MISSING w/ it's EXTRA counterpart. >
Other than figuring out all the needed patterns to find and "normalize" the names of the files, I don't know of any "special sauce" you can use. > In this sense, the behavour of git (iiuc) would be roughly what I want > where it tracks bytes, not files (this is what I think I undertand; it > allows git to track a function being moved from one file to another -- > I don't understand how it works, but it sounds like what I want -- > keep track of collections of bytes regardless of the name of their > container (the filename). > I didn't know git could do that. Ignoring function renames and polymorphism, I can see using something like ctags to virtually subdivide files into functions for tracking at that level.
_______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
