From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: nickrob@snap.net.nz (Nick Roberts) Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: vc-dir with Subversion Date: Sat, 4 Apr 2009 12:13:09 +1300 Message-ID: <18902.38917.199665.733866@totara.tehura.co.nz> References: <18901.49921.885006.143162@totara.tehura.co.nz> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1238807886 15247 80.91.229.12 (4 Apr 2009 01:18:06 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 4 Apr 2009 01:18:06 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: rms@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Apr 04 03:19:24 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1LpuXZ-0007js-K6 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 04 Apr 2009 03:19:21 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:47681 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LpuWB-0006XB-KT for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 03 Apr 2009 21:17:55 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LpuVL-00063J-AX for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 03 Apr 2009 21:17:03 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LpuVG-00062Y-Gj for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 03 Apr 2009 21:17:02 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=35301 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LpuVG-00062U-BJ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 03 Apr 2009 21:16:58 -0400 Original-Received: from mail.caverock.net.nz ([202.37.101.29]:57848 helo=viper.snap.net.nz) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1LpuVC-0008Fz-C1; Fri, 03 Apr 2009 21:16:54 -0400 Original-Received: from totara (unknown [123.255.28.109]) by viper.snap.net.nz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 501593DA620; Sat, 4 Apr 2009 12:13:10 +1300 (NZDT) Original-Received: by totara (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 4CEC5C080; Sat, 4 Apr 2009 12:13:09 +1300 (NZDT) In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: VM 7.19 under Emacs 22.2.1 X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.4-2.6 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:110053 Archived-At: Richard M Stallman writes: > 1) Prior to updating. > 2) After updating. > > but labels the status with the keyword `conflict' in both cases. In the > latter case all other keywords use the past tense: removed, edited, > unregistered etc. To avoid confusion I suggest that we use the keyword > `conflicted' for this case. The patch below does this. > > The difference between "conflict" and "conflicted" is small. > If this distinction is important, I think it is important to make > it more prominent. > > Which of these two cases is a CVS conflict similar to? vc-dir with CVS doesn't recognise the first case and just reports the state as `needs-merge'. That's because it uses the command `cvs status' which doesn't report that therre will be a conflict (it gives "Status: Needs Patch" in this case. Interestingly "cvs -n up" does recognise there would be a conflict in it's output (with the letter `C'). > I think it is case 2, that a conflict in CVS is reported > after updating. If that is true, it seems to me that case 2 > should be described with "conflict" and case 1 should have > some other name. It is case 2. I didn't consider CVS in my e-mail, but I think it would be more logical to change that case (CVS) to `conflicted'.