[EMAIL PROTECTED] on 02/13/2000 01:05:37 AM
>Please document exactly when and why having CVS search in its parent
>directories to find out if it's in a valid CVS workspace can somehow
>cause damage under circumstances that would be possible with normal use
>of CVS.
No, Greg. You keep arguing the wrong point. It seems many (if not all) on this
list is arguing that IT IS NOT *NECESSARY*. *NECESSARY* has nothing to do with
whether or not it's harmful. Neither has it anything to do with being a "nice"
feature. I want to make it clear that I am really neither for nor against
upward recursion -- one one hand, it can make my life easier, OTOH, it may cause
some headaches for others. Really, Greg, if you consider this so essential to
the way you work, why not submit the patch for the server disconnect (ie one
change per commit) and keep using your wrapper to do the upward recursion?
>Why should I? It's my proposal. I'm going to do the coding. If you
>don't like what I produce then you're free not to use it. I only made
>the proposal public so that those willing to participate in an academic
>discussion of it could help me work out any missing bits, etc. So far
>maybe 10% of the discussion has in fact actually helped me out.
That's right. And if the maintainers deem the patch "dangerous" or "harmful",
neither the server-disconnect (which I think is good) nor the upward recursion
will make it into the standard release. Some of these features will have more
of a chance of making it in if you stuck to "one change per commit".
Noel
