On 11/7/05, Eric Scheid <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 7/11/05 3:22 PM, "Luke Arno" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> I sure hope we can find some other way of traversing recent changes which > >> isn't leaky. > >> > > > > leaky (permitting the unwanted passage of fluids or gases ) [1] > > in which direction? > > consider using a bucket with a hole in it to bail out your boat. That bucket > would be called "leaky", even though the nature of the leak is that water > stays in the bottom of your boat, unmoved. > > using a method to move stuff from there to here which has an unwanted effect > of leaving some behind ... that's leaky. >
Again, key word: 'unwanted'. Words like leaky and broken imply intentions. None of you arguments have convinced me that most cases need insignificant updates before edit time. You keep showing me that I don't get insignificant updates at sync and claiming that I don't understand. That is *not* the issue. The issue is that I have not been shown a case that I believe is a real problem. - Luke
