First of all, sorry for sounding "demanding". This was *by no means* my
intention. My intention was simply to ask why it's not on the 1.5/1.6
schedule/list of suggested features, even though it has come up several
times on the users mailing list. This is what I did and nothing else.
You probably either mis- or "over" interpreted my mail as if I wanted this
feature in there "right now" (see below).
On Fri, 23 Mar 2007, Erik Huelsmann wrote:
> Because it is a *lot* of *hard* work? Because people want
> merge-tracking more? Because people wanted sparse-directories too?
> Because ... (well, many reasons)
I'am well aware that there are many reasons. I was also never questioning
that this could be (and as you tell me, indeed *is*) hard work.
Communicating to the users list which desired item takes which effort to be
completed would make it much easier for Subversion users to be actually
aware of what features are easier to implement than others.
> >Is it being worked on at all?
> >Aplogies in case I'm wrong or I've overlook something and thanks in advance
> >for the info.
> You're not wrong, but you are sounding demanding. What did *you* do to
> make sure rename support is in it?
To be honest, nothing. I'm a Subversion *user* (that's why I'm subscribed to
the users mailing list. If I were a Subversion developer, I would also be
subscribed to the developer list. You can (and should not) expect every
Subversion user who asks a simple question about a particular feature
to be a Subversion *developer*. Sure, there indeed *are* users that are users
and developers alike (and thus probably are subscribed to both mailing
lists), but this should not be seen as the common case. (Obviously) *expecting*
a user to be a developer as well is just plain unjustified (to put it in a
somewhat polite way). In a less polite way I would simply consider it brain
damaged since if someone asks a question like the one above on a users
mailing list is obviously not aware of the distinction between users and
And by the way, as I pointed out above, I did not mean to sound demanding.
Mis- and/or overinterpreting the content of mails has never helped anybody
and is a common source for unnecessary misunderstandings.
Just take the written word and comment straight on it instead of making
wrong interpretations. Leave interpretations up to Perl, awk, and other
interpreters :-). They are doing a much better job of making interpretations
than most human beings :-))) Acting that way, we can all get along much
Received on Mon Mar 26 11:42:21 2007