Re: MTime resurrected

Rick Yorgason <rick_at_longbowgames.com> writes:

> So if you add the option to treat mtime-only changes as modifications,
> I definitely don't think it should be the default option. It's also
> probably safe to leave that option out until some squeeky wheels speak
> up.

It's not an option, it's an important decision that is intrinsic to the
implementation. So you can't "leave that option out until ...".

Forget about the default behaviout, that is not going to change (your
last suggestion to allow mtime to move into the future causes problems
for make, just like allowing mtime to move into the past).

The defailt behaviour is not the thing that is blocking progress. What
is blocking progress is saying things like "leave that option out
until..." rather than working out how it should behave and be
implemented.

-- 
uberSVN: Apache Subversion Made Easy
http://www.uberSVN.com