> >> We are only ever going to hear the complaints. That does not > mean > >> they speak for the majority of users. > > > > Oh, I didn't mean to imply that I'd expect people to write in > > out of the blue, asking for the feature to be kept. > > > > I meant to say that I cannot recall any user ever requesting > > that auto-upgrades be kept during a discussion about whether > > or not auto-upgrades should be happening or not. > > > > Is there anyone? If so, speak up, now is your chance :) > > Well TortoiseSVN, as an example, has been downloaded over 22 > million times: > > http://sourceforge.net/top/topalltime.php?type=downloads > > I would guess a good percentage of those users, likely the > majority, > use no other SVN client. In the Eclipse world we certainly have a > decent number of users that do not know what a command line is or > use > any other client (probably not a majority of users though). > > I think anyone that basically just uses one client enjoys the fact > that they do not have to think about this aspect of Subversion. We > will soon enough learn if having to take a specific upgrade step > introduces any usability problems for these users. > > As I said though, I still think the explicit upgrade makes sense. > It > might cause some pain though. >
tortoise is a GUI and it could present a simple "Ok to upgrade your working copy" dialog. Perhaps an email on the user list to do an informal poll? BOb
