No need to get all worked up :-)
I threw it in simply because I didn't know whether people used it. I use
"cvs stat" myself.
Cheers,
-g
On Mon, May 21, 2001 at 03:17:01PM -0500, Ben Collins-Sussman wrote:
> Greg Stein <gstein@lyra.org> writes:
>
> > st
>
> I type 'svn st' a thousand bazillion times per day, while casually
> debugging and QA'ing. This command has become as fundamental as
> typing 'ls' in a directory. Unlike CVS's status command, our status
> command is *short* and *consise*, and instantly tells me what's
> modified, what has props, what's in conflict, etc.
>
> Essentially, I run 'svn st' for the same reason I run 'cvs up' when I
> just want to see a bunch of 'M' characters. But the only reason
> people use 'cvs up' for this reason is because the 'cvs status' output
> is so awful; it's really a horrible reason to run an update. :)
> I'm hoping that 'svn st' becomes the new reflexive habit for everybody.
>
> Thus I adamantly suggest keeping 'st'. I'm trying to promote a habit
> here. :) :)
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
--
Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Sat Oct 21 14:36:30 2006