[Top][All Lists]

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

[Gnu-arch-users] Re: implicit discussion

From: Colin Walters
Subject: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: implicit discussion
Date: Fri, 09 Apr 2004 03:23:50 -0400

On Fri, 2004-04-09 at 02:37, Miles Bader wrote:
> Colin Walters <address@hidden> writes:
> > I added a little flame about implicit tagging to the wiki:
> >
> > 
> > I just thought I'd give implicit proponents a chance to respond :)
> By "implicit", I assume you mean "tagline".

Yeah, my bad for being up at 2am...

> You know you that `tla mv' works with taglines too, right?


> [and of course you can also just always `mv' always and then use a tool
> like `tla-update-ids' before committing.]

Hmmm.  How does that work?  How can tla-update-ids differentiate a moved
file from a deleted one?

> You're gonna get occasional annoyances no matter _which_ method you use,
> so the question is not `Which one is perfect?' (none of them are), but
> `Which one is the least annoying?'.

Totally agreed!  All I'm saying is that I tried tagline and found
explicit less annoying.  I can completely understand people feeling the
opposite though.  Mainly I just didn't want newbies to get the
impression that explicit was broken somehow.

> If your tree is chock-full of binary files which you keep moving around,
> I guess you're going to have get in the habit of using `tla mv' (or some
> other tool), but taglines don't cramp that style.  Might as well use
> taglines anyway for their other benefits.

What other benefits?

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

reply via email to

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