On Mon, 13 Jan 2003, Marcus Alanen wrote:
> >> Any pointers to some documentation/list which can help me 'explain' why
> >> the current __default__ silent behaviour is better ?
> >Yes. We've very deliberately separated 'svn status' from 'svn update'
> >behaviors. We think it's bad design that CVS blurs the two ideas.
> >Notice how CVS users habitually run 'svn up' just to find out what
> >files they've modified, or to see if there are any unversioned files.
> >Really, if 'cvs status' weren't so hard to read, it should be giving
> >them that information instead.
>
> I can verify this myself. I use both svn and cvs, and have a tendency
> to use "cvs -q -n up" or some other variant of it to check the
> actual status. Separating status and update is good.
No doubt about that. Do not get my wrong; I -like- the change.
My problem is how to 'sell' this to experienced managers who over the
years have seen green developers to be being relatively 'lazy' and 'like'
the fact that an update/commit shows specifically any files not yet under
cvs control. And specifically in that sell-story avoid anything which even
slightly hints that this is a 'feature' done by developers for developers
as developers might like not being nagged :-).
Dw
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Mon Jan 13 17:22:53 2003