From: Ron Garret Date: Sat, 30 Jan 2010 19:19:45 GMT Subject: Re: My use case Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <7vtyu3o1hq.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> In article <7vtyu3o1hq.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Ron Garret writes: > > > You are absolutely right. That is another reason why having the > > individual files tracked separately from the main project would be a > > good thing if I can get it to work. (It would be kind of like having a > > git-stash on a per-file basis.) > > When you have more than one functions defined in a file, and the > interactive Lisp development cycle works primarily on s-exp basis, not > necessarily constrained by file boundaries, don't you want even finer > grained control than "stash per-file"? > > I don't think of a good solution myself, but I find your "finer than whole > tree" an interesting topic. You're reading my mind. My long-term vision for this thing is indeed a revision control system based on S-expressions, not files. (I personally think the whole concept of files is fundamentally broken, but that's a whole 'nuther kettle of lobster.) Unfortunately, that opens up a Pandora's box of ancillary issues, which would be seriously off-topic here. If you're interested we can talk about it off-line (or we can do it here if you think it's not too much of a tangent). rg