From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Dmitry Gutov Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: RCS, again: another removed functionality: undo last-checkin Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 05:34:31 +0300 Message-ID: <560C9BB7.2070408@yandex.ru> References: <87oagx6tzz.fsf@mat.ucm.es> <55FF4026.2050004@yandex.ru> <83si68nu4i.fsf@gnu.org> <87eghsfd3m.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <83k2rknr2c.fsf@gnu.org> <87mvwellmg.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <56023A6C.3020302@yandex.ru> <5602BE3E.1050009@yandex.ru> <5602C4DE.8020105@yandex.ru> <560B4899.2070708@yandex.ru> <83wpv8be0x.fsf@gnu.org> <83mvw4b871.fsf@gnu.org> <560BC90B.1040902@yandex.ru> <83eghgatxa.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1443699761 3353 80.91.229.3 (1 Oct 2015 11:42:41 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 11:42:41 +0000 (UTC) Cc: stephen@xemacs.org, dak@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, rms@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Oct 01 13:42:35 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1ZhcFq-0008AQ-4u for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 01 Oct 2015 13:42:30 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:48598 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZhcFo-0004Bq-Vq for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 01 Oct 2015 07:42:28 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:39698) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZhThe-0002EN-JU for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 30 Sep 2015 22:34:39 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZhThb-0005Xo-Ca for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 30 Sep 2015 22:34:38 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-la0-x230.google.com ([2a00:1450:4010:c03::230]:35965) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZhThb-0005Xc-51; Wed, 30 Sep 2015 22:34:35 -0400 Original-Received: by laclj5 with SMTP id lj5so66333682lac.3; Wed, 30 Sep 2015 19:34:34 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=sender:subject:to:references:cc:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=0DuQ63scRcILZM6xBiu2D6cbJWVjRRoQFwbjlcHmTJ0=; b=TydVxtdXpd7gVAf50a1aD4tG/OIhubVp4Jgym4k7zJLq26Km4IS4sc9LDSDjmf0wCY nILwmO/rMtOtbtN2lfydPYQS27T3da9esLhNzyStgThbxrUXLtFFnuTNNorkHoK3KAU5 knAl7gnhlPWiLihd/ZBgMvVu+K8Yt4WtSEQWDFKKTfOSYU42ANVub54dBSK9jHPb1S5m pty51PhcSWd8R3LpntiR5MUfmfbvqJDrWW5mlXcx8s3/8RyN73wOH7rzVBvYXkkobDde xW9wmBGYbe/mM2sXd6u+/1XuTsq5YHEZNeVnvOlMkWP4LSgv0bftUHbrMfclqwHPBGT4 LCOQ== X-Received: by 10.112.140.104 with SMTP id rf8mr1687967lbb.30.1443666874448; Wed, 30 Sep 2015 19:34:34 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from [192.168.1.190] ([178.252.127.222]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id dt5sm378168lac.26.2015.09.30.19.34.32 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 30 Sep 2015 19:34:33 -0700 (PDT) User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:41.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/41.0 In-Reply-To: <83eghgatxa.fsf@gnu.org> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Error: Malformed IPv6 address (bad octet value). X-Received-From: 2a00:1450:4010:c03::230 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:190539 Archived-At: On 09/30/2015 05:00 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > Maybe we should simply leave the locking VCSes out of this. People > who use those back-ends have used vc-next-action for a long time, so I > guess they won't really need vc-steal-lock. Well, there are not too many key bindings we can use. Being able to bind vc-checkin to `C-x v v' instead of `vc-next-action' would be nice. IMO, it's the main argument in favor of deprecating the latter command. > IOW, let's make vc-checkin interactive so that it assumes the files > are not locked by someone else. WDYT? Do we make a separate binding for it?