[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: retrograding with convert-ly

From: Graham Percival
Subject: Re: retrograding with convert-ly
Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2012 03:41:38 +0100
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)

On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 02:11:29AM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
> -d means no update in version header unless changes happen.  That is
> also usually what you would want.  Without -d, the version of the last
> applicable rule is used instead (rather than the last rule actually
> causing a change).
> In the case that no rule would be applied because the file is already
> newer than all rules, I think it would make sense _not_ to change the
> version header even without -d.

If we did that, then people would complain "I'm using 2.16.2 but
convert-ly only updates my file to 2.16.0!".  This could be
avoided by printing a message to the effect of "no changes to
apply; not changing version number in the file".

As a general rule, I don't think it matters whether we make -d or
not -d the default; what matters most is providing good
information to the user in some combination of program output
and/or documentation.

- Graham

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]