On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 9:13 PM, Branko Čibej <branko.cibej_at_wandisco.com> wrote:
> On 28.06.2012 01:32, Greg Stein wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 7:19 PM, Johan Corveleyn <jcorvel_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 10:51 AM, Stefan Sperling <stsp_at_elego.de> wrote:
>>>> On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 07:51:59PM -0400, Greg Stein wrote:
>>> ...
>>>> I would prefer to by default keep working copy upgrades manual from now on.
>>> +1, let's please keep it an explicit action by the user.
>> Not sure about that. The user will type 'svn move' and not get the
>> benefits. All the docs will say it *should* work, but it doesn't.
>
> Not to mention feature-invariant updates, such as the new MD5 index. if
> you don't have it, nothing breaks except your patience. :)
>
> Realistically, we've "taught" users and especially packagers to expect
> silent updates (and have said loudly enough that 1.7/WC-NG is an
> exception). I think we should just keep on doing that.
Agreed, and I'm against the auto-update as well.
I understand that people run a heterogenous collection of tools, and
they aren't all upgraded at the same time. Doing a manual upgrade
ensures that people know they are upgrading, and that they hopefully
are aware enough to upgrade their other clients. People running
multiple disparate clients are doing so under their own providence,
and we can't be expected to save them from themselves.
-Hyrum
Received on 2012-06-28 05:24:47 CEST