On Sat, Jun 08, 2013 at 03:27:56PM +0200, Łukasz Gruner wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 8, 2013, at 14:24, Markus Teich wrote:
> > Please, enlighten me!
> >
> > --Markus
> >
> >
> > Am 08.06.2013 13:18, schrieb Łukasz Gruner:
> > > you might use a real version control instead of git.
> >
>
> not having any particular one in mind, just one that behaves properly,
> git is not yet ready to be used as a general version control, as it has
> no proper user-facing api.
I'm unsure where you are getting this from...
>
> Anyway,
> my setup for this task (not saying it is suckless, just that it works
> for me) involves:
> - a set of dirs for different file types (ie. dot/ for files which
> whilst linking will be prefixed with a dot, bin/ for compiled stuff)
> - makefile which does the hardlinking, compiling etc
Actually quite a good idea, I must say.
> - a set of mercurial subrepos (ie, dwm is mercurial subrepo thanks to
> hg-git extension, and my own patchqueue for dwm is a subrepo parallel to
> dwm - makefile understands how to deal with them)
>
> All the editable files are getting hardlinked and dirs - ie. ~/.vim/ -
> are created. Binary files are copied. There is no automagical adding of
> dotfiles to the repo.
--
William Giokas | KaiSforza | http://kaictl.net/
GnuPG Key: 0x73CD09CF
Fingerprint: F73F 50EF BBE2 9846 8306 E6B8 6902 06D8 73CD 09CF
- application/pgp-signature attachment: stored
Received on Sat Jun 08 2013 - 21:04:49 CEST