Re: Revert has no implicit dot-target.

On Wed, Jul 10, 2002 at 02:13:17PM -0400, Ben Collins wrote:
> It just seems intuitive (as I've tried the command several times still
> expecting it to work :) that if I say "recursive" and don't pass an arg,
> I mean ".". Obviously, since recursive is not the default, and implicit
> dot-target for that case wouldn't make any sense, nor would it work in a
> logical manner.
>
> Just a thought. I'm not really hung up on it.

FWIW, I agree with Ben.

If I say --recursive, I implicitly want '.'. -- justin

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Wed Jul 10 20:30:15 2002