From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Juanma Barranquero" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: vc-diff in non-VC buffer Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2007 23:58:20 +0200 Message-ID: References: <20071010173802.GC787@thyrsus.com> <20071010214929.GB1297@thyrsus.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1192053518 1338 80.91.229.12 (10 Oct 2007 21:58:38 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2007 21:58:38 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Emacs Devel To: esr@thyrsus.com Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Oct 10 23:58:35 2007 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 1IfjZZ-0006CC-2C for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 23:58:33 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfjZT-00042f-BB for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 17:58:27 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1IfjZQ-00041c-5x for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 17:58:24 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1IfjZN-00040w-Rz for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 17:58:23 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfjZN-00040s-PR for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 17:58:21 -0400 Original-Received: from wx-out-0506.google.com ([66.249.82.233]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1IfjZN-0008KR-Ch for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 17:58:21 -0400 Original-Received: by wx-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id s7so310280wxc for ; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 14:58:20 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=VgoODSHdHi2qvmvg6khRazm8jMg6eTp7ZC9xzFOgVoY=; b=lppbaVdNlaH/Fm0/B8Xiz35E4mGTHn48shPx599glO9Jrh6eWHxu9f2MRxBnKQ3jJGvwm4OLigSObydVVJkcfXfqNyx4ADotl9jv7+6vp89Af5kRibsHNz/vlQbDZU0KC6I76sRPeZ8sslXzT5jOT3xyNkZn3J+H91I09FW69v0= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=Op62cFzD1uUEjZ2+d/OX+PX3+HAWtjFUnGw14L4yyC7p9hZ6hvUbQSyWvKBJI6A9YNZParYm36ja2tGh3VN+ptUj4DjVIbLdGUmz0bEKPgCuT6NQD8umsV1MHnNTingnJENI5z18uPRniq8rgHrC2xxw47wo3xNOmzXGHVLB7SY= Original-Received: by 10.90.118.8 with SMTP id q8mr1832857agc.1192053500564; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 14:58:20 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by 10.90.103.8 with HTTP; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 14:58:20 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20071010214929.GB1297@thyrsus.com> Content-Disposition: inline X-Detected-Kernel: Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) 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:80551 Archived-At: On 10/10/07, Eric S. Raymond wrote: > Hm. Even if there are other version-controlled files beneath the > current directory? Well, I'm not sure about this case, I'd have to think it over. I suppose that such behavior would make sense when asking for vc-diff in dired, or selecting a directory in some way. But vc-diff in a buffer visiting a file *not* under version-control... no, I wouldn't expect a tree search. Anyway, I have no version-controlled files in my %HOME dir or beneath it, and C-x v = while editing the .emacs file now tries to do some version-control processing (with predictably bad results), while before it just said: "File c:/home/.emacs is not under version control", which seems sensible. I'm not saying my view is the only one reasonable, but to me the current behavior is a regression. > I think people are likely to become quite upset with me if I > remove that. Then at the very least make it a user option, please. Juanma