> Because even trivial features are expensive... sheesh. you've got all the hooks there to do it, the logic there to do it, it would probably be 5 lines of code, and about 4 lines of documentation. That's expensive? Its the philosophical part you don't like, and you really should let the user decide on whether they want software that DWIM.
Anyways, I agree with you Kaz... That's how I was *using* .cvsignore - thinking that was giving me some sort of protection against certain files being checked in. Until I looked at the code, and saw it was doing no such thing - and proceeded to look at the cvs trees that I'd set up (but no longer actively maintain) and found out they were cluttered with junk. .cvsblock was just a sap for backwards compatibility. I like your sap for backwards compatibility better. Ed _______________________________________________ Info-cvs mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs
