On Fri, 24 Oct 2008, Giuseppe Bilotta wrote: > On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 12:31 PM, Jakub Narebski <jnareb@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> "Giuseppe Bilotta" <giuseppe.bilotta@xxxxxxxxx> writes: >>> On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 1:23 AM, Jean-Luc Herren <jlh@xxxxxx> wrote: >>>> If you decide against a shared repository, maybe you want to >>>> consider to not use ".zit.file/", but ".zit/file/" as the >>>> repository? This would reduce the clutter to a single directory, >>>> just like with ".git". And moving files around wouldn't be that >>>> much complicated. >>> >>> Right. I'll give that a shot. >> >> By the way RCS which I use for version control of single files use >> both approaches: it can store 'file,v' alongside 'file' (just like >> your '.zit.file/' or '.file.git/'), but it can also store files on >> per-directory basis in 'RCS/' subdirectory (proposed '.zit/file/' or >> '.zit/file.git/' solution) > > Indeed, there's not particular reason why both solutions shouldn't be > available. [...] > The only problem then is priority. When looking for a file's repo, do > we look at .file.git first, or .zit/file.git? How does RCS behave in > this case? rcsintro(1) states: If you don't want to clutter your working directory with RCS files, create a subdirectory called RCS in your working directory, and move all your RCS files there. RCS commands will look *first* into that directory to find needed files. >> By the way, it would be nice to have VC interface for Emacs for Zit... > > I'm afraid someone else will have to take care of that, since Emacs is > not really something I use. I'll try to hack it using contrib/emacs/vc-git.el as a base... -- Jakub Narebski Poland -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
