Re: RCS, again: another removed functionality: undo last-checkin

[Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca>]

> It also performs that weird step: "If every file in the VC fileset is not
> registered for version control, register the fileset (but don't commit)",
> aborting if some of the files in the fileset are unregistered and others
> are registered.

Right.  From a modern VCS's point of view, I think vc-next-action just
doesn't make any sense, and trying to be more clever at guessing what
the user intended won't get us very far.

That's why I think we'd be better off providing vc-commit.  AFAIK, all
other operations provided by vc-next-action can be reached via other
commands, so the only new command that's really needed is vc-commit.

Then we can just keep vc-next-action for those old VCSes or for those
rare users who like it.

> The section dedicated to "For old-style locking-based version control
> systems" in vc-next-action's docstring is more convoluted. As long as we're
> dedicated to supporting them, I'm not sure what change would be appropriate.

The change I'm hinting at is to declare vc-next-action obsolete, tho
I know Eric won't like it.  But even if we want to keep it, I think it's
important, from a design point of view, to make sure that it's never
*necessary* to use vc-next-action.


        Stefan