Re: Reverting but keeping undo

[Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net>]

Michael Heerdegen <michael_heerdegen@web.de> writes:

> Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> writes:
>
>> > I wonder how that works.
>>
>> The revert is considered as a change like any other.  I.e. the first
>> undo step simply undoes the buffer modifications introduced by the
>> revert.
>
> That sounds good, thanks.
>
> I wonder, however, if the user will notice when he passes that point
> while successively undoing.  I.e., for the case the user doesn't want to
> undo prior reverts, maybe there could be some kind of warning in the
> minibuffer.

Another warning?

First Stefan for the explanation.

Undoing a revert sounds very intuitive to me.
The fact that it was missing before was sort of dangerous.

And the confirmation dialog on the revert was no fun,
I had my own solution for bypassing the warning.

I see no reason for any additional warnings.
If you can undo revert, the natural assumption should be that
you can keep doing undo.

I assume this change kills off the old confirmation about reverting.
(Posting from news:gnu.emacs.help).


-- 
Dan Espen