On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 9:24 PM, bch <brad.har...@gmail.com> wrote: > I'm not following the process. Fossil guarantees hash fidelity - explain > differently how this would work and be coherent w/i fossil? >
i'm not discounting that it could work exactly as you describe, but i would consider it a "highly unfortunate" feature to add to fossil (or any SCM, for that matter). It adds the complexity of a 2nd hash for the 1-in-100k case of "needing" to perform text replacement at checkin-time. Any such system is inherently not "commit what you test" because what you committed cannot possibly be what you tested, as the contents have necessarily changed between testing and committing. -- ----- 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
