[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: vc-status vs pcl-cvs
From: |
Stefan Monnier |
Subject: |
Re: vc-status vs pcl-cvs |
Date: |
Wed, 04 Jun 2008 21:58:09 -0400 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.0.60 (gnu/linux) |
> I disagree. I think "stay-local" is useful only when you not connected
> to the internet,
Why? The only difference is that it'll show you some "needs-update".
No other backend ever does that, and nobody ever cmplained about them.
Of course, there (c|sh)ould be a command (let's call it vc-pull-dry-run)
that you can run from vc-dir to see what needs to be merged from
upstream, but the main vc-dir command should be as quick as possible, to
show you the current state of the tree, i.e. which files are
locally modified.
Stefan
- Re: vc-status vs pcl-cvs, (continued)
- Re: vc-status vs pcl-cvs, Dan Nicolaescu, 2008/06/04
- Re: vc-status vs pcl-cvs, Stefan Monnier, 2008/06/04
- Re: vc-status vs pcl-cvs, Dan Nicolaescu, 2008/06/04
- Re: vc-status vs pcl-cvs, Nick Roberts, 2008/06/05
- Re: vc-status vs pcl-cvs, Stefan Monnier, 2008/06/05
- Re: vc-status vs pcl-cvs, Dan Nicolaescu, 2008/06/05
- Re: vc-status vs pcl-cvs, Sam Steingold, 2008/06/05
- Re: vc-status vs pcl-cvs, Stefan Monnier, 2008/06/05
- Re: vc-status vs pcl-cvs, Dan Nicolaescu, 2008/06/06
- Re: vc-status vs pcl-cvs, Sam Steingold, 2008/06/04
- Re: vc-status vs pcl-cvs,
Stefan Monnier <=
- Re: vc-status vs pcl-cvs, Nick Roberts, 2008/06/04
- Re: vc-status vs pcl-cvs, Dan Nicolaescu, 2008/06/04
- Re: vc-status vs pcl-cvs, Nick Roberts, 2008/06/05
- Re: vc-status vs pcl-cvs, Stefan Monnier, 2008/06/05
- Re: vc-status vs pcl-cvs, Sam Steingold, 2008/06/04