[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: VOTE (and current summary)

From: Kevin Pilch-Bisson <kevin_at_pilch-bisson.net>
Date: 2001-09-25 15:18:42 CEST

On Tue, Sep 25, 2001 at 08:22:53AM -0500, kfogel@collab.net wrote:
> Thanks for the votes, everyone!
>
> It's roughly 2-to-1 in favor of default `svn status' using short
> format, with revision numbers only being shown when either `--verbose'
> or `--update' is passed. (Showing them with `--update' was mentioned
> only after voting started, but seems unlikely anyone would object,
> since with that flag you even get the repository head revision to
> compare with.)
>

All good, except, can we not name the switch --update. I think it is
confusing to have 'svn update' and 'svn status --update'. And what behaviour
would svn update --update have? I don't have a better solution, except maybe
svn status -c/--contact-repos.

-- 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Kevin Pilch-Bisson                    http://www.pilch-bisson.net
     "Historically speaking, the presences of wheels in Unix
     has never precluded their reinvention." - Larry Wall
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

  • application/pgp-signature attachment: stored
Received on Sat Oct 21 14:36:42 2006

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.