Eric Siegerman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Personally, I'd be in favour of CVS hiding the distinction > between "patch" and "update". They both lead to the same end > state, and which method CVS chooses is an implementation detail > that's irrelevent to end users. > > The "P" status and the "checksum failure" message should both go > away. (Patched and fully-refetched files should all be labelled > "U".) I can understand wanting to distinguish the different > cases while debugging, but that's what "#ifdef DEBUG" is for... I certainly agree about the "checksum failure" message - it can cause consternation among users. I'm not so sure I agree about hiding the distinction, though. Is there any use-case in which the user would really need to know? For example, concern over bandwidth - if the user sees 'U', then they may choose to use the -z global option for compression, which they may not otherwise use. Am I stretching things, maybe?
You could always submit a patch, and see if anyone notices that 'P' never shows up any more ;=) -- Jim Hyslop Senior Software Designer Leitch Technology International Inc. (<http://www.leitch.com/>) Columnist, C/C++ Users Journal (<http://www.cuj.com/experts>) _______________________________________________ Info-cvs mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs
