On Fri, 29 Jul 2011 22:22:05 -0400 "R. David Murray" <rdmurray at bitdance.com> wrote: > On Fri, 29 Jul 2011 23:36:03 +0200, Antoine Pitrou <solipsis at pitrou.net> wrote: > > On Fri, 29 Jul 2011 12:19:45 -0400 > > "R. David Murray" <rdmurray at bitdance.com> wrote: > > > > > > > Besides, "hg status" is meant to show untracked files which could > > > > *potentially* be tracked. It's not like anybody wants to track .orig > > > > and .rej files, so having them in the ignore list is still the right > > > > thing to do. > > > > > > That's one view. My view is that 'hg status' tells me all the files > > > that have appeared in my tree that I'm either not currently tracking or > > > explicitly ignoring (because the project's automated tools will deal > > > with them). Nothing in there about limiting it to files I *might* > > > want to track. That is how I've always used my version control > > > systems. > > > > Ok, I understand. However, it also makes things more tedious for other > > people who don't user their VCS in such a way, so it would be nice how > > other people feel about this. > > They can add those files to their personal .hgrc. I can't *remove* > those ignores via mine. That's a good point. I hadn't thought about that. Regards Antoine.
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4