[Gnu-arch-users] Re: sources perms in arch archive

[Miles Bader]

Zenaan Harkness <address@hidden> writes:
> In tla, this checkout/ edit step seems to be unnecessary (makes me
> wonder why it's in bitkeeper - I actually got burnt by it once - makes
> it look like a regular scm to MSVC I guess - all those SCCS dirs or
> whatever).

Certainly that style of operation is pretty annoying, but it does have
an advantage:  you can make the equivalent of "tla changes" really fast
without too much work or cleverness (since you have a handy list of
exactly what you need to check, and it's only as big as the user's
working set).

> But it seems I just change the perms in tla, and it gets reflected
> with "tla changes", and will get included in my next changeset
> creation.
>
> A bit of a disconnect until I realised - hey, that's actually simpler,
> right?

I'd just chmod your whole tree to be writable, and commit a one-time
"Change perms" changeset to reflect that change.

-Miles
-- 
The secret to creativity is knowing how to hide your sources.
  --Albert Einstein