Re: Reasoning behind convert-ly rule for stable update?

[Janek Warchoł]

2013/11/24 David Kastrup <address@hidden>:
> Ok, here is what _might_ have been the idea from the code.  Suppose that
> I have a file for version 2.15.5 and I run convert-ly 2.17.8 without
> options on the file, and there is one conversion applied at 2.15.11.
> Then instead of claiming the file to be 2.15.11, stuff gets rounded up
> and 2.16.0 is claimed instead, just losing a bit of history within
> unstable versions.
>
> That would make some sense.  It would not make things significantly more
> efficient, but it would throw away old unstable version history which is
> not all that interesting.  But the code currently does not appear to
> work this way: it seems to promote even an unchanged 2.16.0 to 2.18.0.
> And besides, updates when there are _no_ changes should be skipped in
> either case.  I'll try to see whether I figure something out in that
> direction.

+1