On 08/29/2011 11:21 AM, Neels J Hofmeyr wrote: > Anyone up for discussing the two '###'-comments in this patch's log message? > I think this patch is necessary, but feel free to discuss it to smithereens. > I'd say +1 for both '###'-comments, for consistency with dir externals.
[...]
> ### It is debatable if even explicit targets should be skipped.
I agree that it seems weird to allow commits to pegged resources. ("I want
to share this change with the world, but by golly I don't want it myself!")
> ### It is also debatable if we should also skip *un*pegged file externals
> from recursion, just like we do with dir externals.
I tend to lobby for treatment of file externals more consistently with
directory externals. But now that our commit crawler can handle multi-WC
commits, we could probably enable commit recursion into directory externals
which are pulled from the same repository as the primary one. (Maybe Bert
has some thoughts about this?)
--
C. Michael Pilato <cmpil...@collab.net>
CollabNet <> www.collab.net <> Distributed Development On Demand
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
