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

Re: Small bug - svn status -vN

From: <kfogel_at_newton.ch.collab.net>
Date: 2003-01-23 00:39:33 CET

Eric Hopper hopper@omnifarious.org writes:
 Since I can't touch the issue, I'll just say that the explicit '.'
 method seems right to me. Given that I had never seen the issue or the
 discussion surrounding it before, that's the behavior I expected. I
 understand the appeal of having an explicit option to satisfy a certain
 aesthetic sense. But really, it's the more important for the pieces
 people interact with directly to behave in a manner they do not find
 surprising. If 'svn st' felt a little more like 'ls' to use, I would
 recommend '-d' instead.
 If ever I get a wild hair and decide to make up a patch for this issue,
 is it likely to be accepted? Or, are you simply not going to bother at
 all until after 1.0?

We're probably not going to do it before 1.0 -- but in any case, not
sure precisely what new behavior you're proposing. Describe it in detail?

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Sat Oct 14 02:07:46 2006

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

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.