[ On Monday, February 28, 2000 at 16:57:30 (-0500), Noel L Yap wrote: ]
> Subject: Re: removing the need for "cvs add file" to contact the server....
>
> Again, you're absolutely right. Users shouldn't rely on the optimisation you
> propose. They should instead be using the ignore facility.
I think you've totally missed the significance of a very major point.
All of your argument crumbles to a great void in the face of it.
That point is that the CVS "ignore" facility will be over-ridden by any
explicit specification of any name on the command line that would be
otherwise ignored. This goes for both directories and filenames.
Perhaps you should re-read the documentation on how the CVS "ignore"
facility works and try some experiments too.
> Furthermore, your optimisation *will* cause CVS to do extra work when it comes
> to empty directory hierarchies.
Hmm... really? Are you really sure you know what kinds of
optimisations I'm talking about?
Since those optimisations are already a part of the existing
implementation perhaps you can show us with concrete and tested examples
of how you think they could cause CVS to do extra work on empty
directory hierarchies.
> This is not a side issue. CVS commands are CVS commands. You cannot be biased
> towards/against one "set" of commands just 'cos you don't use them.
On the contrary.
But regardless the solution for them will be fairly obvious once the
rest of it is worked out....
--
Greg A. Woods
+1 416 218-0098 VE3TCP <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <robohack!woods>
Planix, Inc. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Secrets of the Weird <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
