Re: Patch for "mv -s" option

[Jim Meyering]

Paul Eggert <address@hidden> wrote:
> Jim Meyering <address@hidden> writes:
>> Vacillating even more, do I want cp ever to remove its source FILEs?
>
> Probably not.  That's a strong argument to making this an 'mv' option
> rather than a 'cp' option.
>
>> For now, I'm inclined to add an option to cp rather than mv,
>> but am open to arguments to the contrary.
>
> But all your arguments were in the opposite direction.  (And they were
> so strong that they convinced me.  :-)

Thanks for catching that.
What I meant to say:

  For now, I'm inclined to add an option to mv rather than cp,
  but am open to arguments to the contrary.