This is a welcome addition to house nuisance files like bitmaps, icons, etc. But, I am confused by the in-out nomenclature?
Push to remote: fossil unversioned sync Pull from remote: fossil unversioned revert Checkout unv files: fossil unversioned export FILE //1 at a time? If we have the prefix "fossil unversioned", why not allow Push and Pull for familiarity? And I'd prefer "fossil checkout" to have an unversioned switch to extract unv files to disk instead of individual calls/file? Thanks for Fossil! On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 5:15 PM, Ross Berteig <r...@cheshireeng.com> wrote: > On 8/30/2016 1:55 PM, Ron W wrote: > >> Why only "sync -u" ? >> > > Probably to give an easy way to distinguish developer's clones from full > mirrors. If the unversioned files are built releases, then I don't need > them on my dev machine, so no reason to sync them. > > If unversioned files are used for something else, syncing them might make > more sense. > > It might also make more sense for that to be controlled by a setting > rather than a command line option to fossil sync. I'm not sure about that, > without thinking through other use cases. > > On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 2:31 PM, Richard Hipp <d...@sqlite.org >> <mailto:d...@sqlite.org>> wrote: >> >> A new feature of Fossil (currently unreleased and only available to >> people who are willing to recompile the code on trunk) is "unversioned >> files". >> .... >> > > -- > Ross Berteig r...@cheshireeng.com > Cheshire Engineering Corp. http://www.CheshireEng.com/ > +1 626 303 1602 > > _______________________________________________ > 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
