It doesn't have to be so bad if it takes care of your "ignore" settings as well. I think such an option may be good, at least for someone who did a large re-org of the files in the project. However, I agree with Greg A. Woods that the place of such options is not CVS itself but rather wrappers of CVS or GUIs.
Shlomo -----Original Message----- From: Mike Ayers [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, October 09, 2002 8:48 PM To: Reinstein, Shlomo Cc: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: Re: "cvs commit" features Reinstein, Shlomo wrote: > Of course, a user can always use "cvs add" and "cvs remove" to add or remove > files, but these two options can help him/her make sure they didn't forget > to do this for some of the files. This is one of those things that might work really well, but only for certain development models. For instance, I am using a GUI based tool. It likes to create lots of files that may or may not need to be archived. I have experimentally determined that if I archive a certain set of them, then there seems to be no problems. Do I want CVS to pester me about the ones I'm not archiving every time I do a commit in that directory? No way! And just think what would happen if you inadvertently did your CVS commit without making clean first... Nannyware sucks. Optional nannying? Hmmm - doesn't the nannyware model *require* that the nagging not be optional? /|/|ike _______________________________________________ Info-cvs mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs
