> >> We are only ever going to hear the complaints. That does not
> >> they speak for the majority of users.
> > Oh, I didn't mean to imply that I'd expect people to write in
> > out of the blue, asking for the feature to be kept.
> > I meant to say that I cannot recall any user ever requesting
> > that auto-upgrades be kept during a discussion about whether
> > or not auto-upgrades should be happening or not.
> > Is there anyone? If so, speak up, now is your chance :)
> Well TortoiseSVN, as an example, has been downloaded over 22
> million times:
> I would guess a good percentage of those users, likely the
> use no other SVN client. In the Eclipse world we certainly have a
> decent number of users that do not know what a command line is or
> any other client (probably not a majority of users though).
> I think anyone that basically just uses one client enjoys the fact
> that they do not have to think about this aspect of Subversion. We
> will soon enough learn if having to take a specific upgrade step
> introduces any usability problems for these users.
> As I said though, I still think the explicit upgrade makes sense.
> might cause some pain though.
tortoise is a GUI and it could present a simple "Ok to upgrade your working copy" dialog.
Perhaps an email on the user list to do an informal poll?
Received on 2010-07-01 16:49:33 CEST