From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Dan Nicolaescu Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: allow C-x v i / C-x v v to create a repository if none is available Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 12:32:59 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <200910091932.n99JWxeG000686@godzilla.ics.uci.edu> References: <200910082047.n98KlkAB020482@godzilla.ics.uci.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1255116895 32448 80.91.229.12 (9 Oct 2009 19:34:55 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 19:34:55 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Oct 09 21:34:47 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 1MwLEk-0001mf-TR for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 09 Oct 2009 21:34:47 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:57395 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MwLEk-00049p-09 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 09 Oct 2009 15:34:46 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MwLEd-00044n-HS for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 09 Oct 2009 15:34:39 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MwLEZ-0003z4-SQ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 09 Oct 2009 15:34:39 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=60826 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MwLEZ-0003yn-NE for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 09 Oct 2009 15:34:35 -0400 Original-Received: from paul-mcgann-v0.ics.uci.edu ([128.195.1.147]:54401) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1MwLEZ-0000ho-89 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 09 Oct 2009 15:34:35 -0400 Original-Received: from godzilla.ics.uci.edu (godzilla.ics.uci.edu [128.195.10.101]) by paul-mcgann-v0.ics.uci.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n99JWxEb031432; Fri, 9 Oct 2009 12:32:59 -0700 Original-Received: (from dann@localhost) by godzilla.ics.uci.edu (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.6/Submit) id n99JWxeG000686; Fri, 9 Oct 2009 12:32:59 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: (Stefan Monnier's message of "Fri, 09 Oct 2009 15:18:15 -0400") Original-Lines: 26 X-ICS-MailScanner-Information: Please send mail to helpdesk@ics.uci.edu or more information X-ICS-MailScanner-ID: n99JWxEb031432 X-ICS-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-ICS-MailScanner-SpamCheck: not spam, SpamAssassin (not cached, score=0.561, required 5, autolearn=disabled, ALL_TRUSTED -1.44, GAPPY_SUBJECT 2.00) X-ICS-MailScanner-From: dann@godzilla.ics.uci.edu X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) 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:116026 Archived-At: Stefan Monnier writes: > > When doing C-x v i or C-x v v on an unregistered file that is in a > > directory not under any version control, the file will be registered > > with RCS. That is not exactly what most users want. > > Very good point. In the past, there wasn't much choice anyway since > creating a CVS repository required a lot more work, but indeed, with > current DVCS such a behavior makes sense again. > > Now, most relevant backends will also want to know where you want to put > the root of your new repository. Should we let the backend function > `create-repo' prompt for this, or should we move it to the generic part > of the code? You seem to have taken the first choice, whereas I'd lean > towards the second. I just took smallest patch path :-), just create the repository in the current directory. Do we have any backend specific function that are required to prompt? I don't think we do. So I'd say that for consistency it would be better to prompt in the generic code. This also avoid the code duplication in all backends. What's your reasoning for leaning towards the second?