Re: svn status proposal

On Fri, Sep 14, 2001 at 09:40:49AM -0500, Ben Collins-Sussman wrote:
...
> In cases 1 and 2, where the network is not accessed, a status
> line would look like:
>
> M 58 [ -] ( -) foo.c

That's still a load of information I don't care about, for a command I
want to use all the time. I'd really love it if this could just be

  M foo.c

> In cases 3 and 4, where update info is fetched, a status line
> would have all the numbers filled in:
>
> M 58 [ 46] ( 60) foo.c
>
>
> I know that in case 1, some people would really like to see the
> revision fields go; but I feel strongly about *not* changing
> the way status lines look based on switches.

That's another argument in favour of doing this as "update --dry-run"
rather than as some switch to status. The functionality you want is
"what will happen if I run svn update"; doing this as a switch to modify
the behaviour of update makes much more sense to me than overloading
status. The "do one thing and do it well" principle?

joe

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Sat Oct 21 14:36:41 2006