Re: vc-status vs pcl-cvs

[Dan Nicolaescu]

Nick Roberts <address@hidden> writes:

  >  > > In that case, do you think [it was] premature to remove vc-directory 
which
  >  > > was better at doing some of the things vc-dir should do?
  >  > 
  >  > AFAIK, it has the same "commit in foreground" and "no way to update the
  >  > whole direcrory" problem.  VC-dir is missing some features, but which
  >  > ones (other than the obvious ones from dired which probably won't be
  >  > added to vc-dir anyway) were present in vc-dired?
  > 
  > vc-dir always needs the repository (even when vc-stay-local is t), 

This would need to be implemented in specific backends (only CVS and svn
care about it).  And it's rather easy: in vc-*-dir-status can use
something like vc-rcs-dir-status.  Patches are welcome.
(IMHO this is not very useful, but if people want it...)

  > mouse-2 doesn't visit files, 

You can talk to the person that implemented the current binding to
change it.

  > vc-dir isn't documented (but vc-directory is)...

Patches are welcome.