Ingolf Steinbach writes:
>
> That is *one* aspect. But I fear that -- even if someone did provide a
> patch (+ ChangeLog entry + sanity test case + ...) -- there might quite
> a good chance that the time was wasted because it would be rejected.
>
> Is there consensus among the developers with write access to the CVS source
> that the cases in which a file which was added with -kb needs to be checked
> out / updated / exported with keyword handling any other than -kb are so
> rare that a patch implementing the suggested change would be accepted?
I wouldn't reject such a patch out of hand. I reguard the current
behavior as a bug, albeit one that isn't very high on my priority list.
-Larry Jones
They can make me do it, but they can't make me do it with dignity. -- Calvin
_______________________________________________
Info-cvs mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs
