On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 8:43 PM, Steve Schow <st...@bstage.com> wrote:
> So one quick question…is a hash created only during commit? doesn’t > happen yet during “add” right? > The hash is calculated during the commit and includes (among many other things) the timestamp of the commit in its calculation. Thus a commit of the exact same information at two points in time (milliseconds-precision, if i'm not mistaken) are guaranteed to have two different hashes. > I always forget, when you’re talking about “checkin” are you referring to > stuff that has been added or stuff that has been committed? > git distinguishes between those in a different way than fossil does. In fossil "add" is kind of like RCS, CVS, and SVN understand "add", and very much NOT how git understands "add". > I hear what you’re saying that, if I commit a file to get the hash, then > update the source to have the new hash, the file then appears as having > been “changed”. Its not clear to me it would continue to be part of the > next checkin though unless it is added again? > That's git terminology - fossil doesn't work that way. > Its just that the file in place would be showing as having changed > compared to the repository, due to the version being updated in there. > Correct. "fossil changes" would list that file as changed. -- ----- stephan beal http://wanderinghorse.net/home/stephan/ "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
