Rick Yorgason <[email protected]> writes: > So if you add the option to treat mtime-only changes as modifications, > I definitely don't think it should be the default option. It's also > probably safe to leave that option out until some squeeky wheels speak > up.
It's not an option, it's an important decision that is intrinsic to the implementation. So you can't "leave that option out until ...". Forget about the default behaviout, that is not going to change (your last suggestion to allow mtime to move into the future causes problems for make, just like allowing mtime to move into the past). The defailt behaviour is not the thing that is blocking progress. What is blocking progress is saying things like "leave that option out until..." rather than working out how it should behave and be implemented. -- uberSVN: Apache Subversion Made Easy http://www.uberSVN.com
