Larry Jones wrote: > Yes, it probably would have saved a lot of confusion if "P" had never > existed. But it has, and the questions about it have mostly died down > now. I'm afraid that getting rid of it will just cause people who were > used to the old behavior (and people using old versions of the > documentation) to start asking why patch suddenly isn't working any
Yes, but it will be much easier for existing users to grasp that "P" has disappeared in favor of "U" than it is for new users to assimilate the difference. As far as old documentation is concerned, with how little users seem to care about "P", I can't imagine that a new user with old documentation who never sees a "P" is going to worry about it. > they mean the same thing -- the reason for two different codes is a > technical detail that they don't need to worry about. "Please ignore the man behind the curtain..." ;) This is mostly about what I've been going with lately, but I still think the alternative would evoke less grumbling. Besides, it's a little embarassing to introduce myself as one of the maintainers of CVS and then have to explain about these little easy-to-fix quirks that we ignore. :) Derek -- Derek R. Price CVS Solutions Architect Ximbiot <http://ximbiot.com> v: +1 717.579.6168 f: +1 717.234.3125 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> _______________________________________________ Bug-cvs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-cvs
