Matthew Braithwaite <email@example.com> writes:
> I think it's a terrible thing to have a program that always produces
> output. Nothing draws attention to a program's output so much as the
> knowledge that it usually runs silently. I'm definitely in the ``if
> cvs update modifies no files it should produce no output'' camp.
That's how subversion behaves. When updating, it only mentions things
that actually received updates.
The one tentative exception is that it may also show locally modified
files, even if they didn't receive updates; but it would not use the
same character for "locally modified" and "merged", since those two
mean different things.
Anyway, this exception is not currently implemented: as update stands
now, its progress report shows only things that actually got changed.
If nothing gets updated, you'll get not output.
Received on Sat Oct 21 14:36:13 2006