Re: Revert has no implicit dot-target.

On Wed, Jul 10, 2002 at 11:29:46AM -0700, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> 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

i do seem to get caught doing 'svn revert --recursive' and forgetting
the . an awful lot, so i'm going to have to agree, the dot should be
implicit in the --recursive case.

-garrett

-- 
garrett rooney                    Remember, any design flaw you're 
rooneg@electricjellyfish.net      sufficiently snide about becomes  
http://electricjellyfish.net/     a feature.       -- Dan Sugalski
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org