|
From: | Rene Schallner |
Subject: | Re: [Gnu-arch-users] request for comments on partial commits |
Date: | Thu, 23 Feb 2006 03:42:59 +0100 |
On Feb 22, 2006, at 07:57 , Andy Tai wrote:
Hi, for the partial commit problem I am thinking of a simple method: the user will have to commit the whole tree after a file renaming or file deletion operation, which means the change to the directory content. Are there any objection to this approach as a short-term measure? Thanks for comments on this.
This is rather an opinion than an objection: That makes moving/ renaming/deletions quite "dangerous" operations, especially when they happen in directories completely unrelated to other "normal" file changes.
It would seem irrational to me if I had to commit the whole tree (example: consisting of ./foo/*.c and ./bar/*.c) when I mv/rm in one directory.
If you hack foo/main.c you can always make a quick bugfix to bar/ module.c and commit the bugfix without having tagged beforehand. But if you renamed/deleted foo/utils.h, you'd be unable to commit just bar/module.c. I'd think "Why does tla bother about ./foo/ when i want to commit a file in ./bar/ ????"
Would it be possible to make a special case for directories unaffected by mv/rm operations?
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |