Ben Collins-Sussman wrote:
> I wrote:
> >
> > The "make argument" is flawed. Read my 2008-06-10 posting
> >
> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.subversion
> .user/77803
>
> Interesting! I agree that 'make' is old and lame. But given that
> it's still ubiquitous: what's the harm in supporting it?
None. But there are at least two things that can be done about that.
The first is the obvious one: make timestamp-preservation optional.
Secondly, even with timestamp-preservation enabled, we can still give
make some help. The thing is, the problem only occurs when files are
backdated. Which means it should be detectable: Whenever an update
caused a file timestamp to go back in time, Subversion could warn the
user that a clean build might be required. At least the GUI clients
could do that; I don't know how well the concept of a warning fits
with the command-line client.
regards, Anders
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help_at_subversion.tigris.org
Received on 2008-07-15 10:07:39 CEST