[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Preventing mistakenly deleting branch tags

From: Stephen Cameron
Subject: Re: Preventing mistakenly deleting branch tags
Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2001 15:07:18 -0700 (PDT)

Hi Donald, (and whoever else might be lurking)

Hmmm, let me address my attitude first :-)  I tend to be a bit sarcastic by
nature, consequently I find myself revising emails over and over trying to
temper them down a bit before hitting "send".

I guess I needed a smiley at the end of that last one.  Good thing you didn't
see my first few drafts! ;-)   I _was_ getting a bit frustrated that we seemed
to be talking in circles, each repeating our side of the argument without
seeming to convince the other, each making a lot of noise about something that
I originally thought would be fairly small and non-controversial.  So, if I've
offended, I apologize, it was not my intent.  I must admit however, that part
of my intent was to try to get someone else to say something, anything,
positive or negative, about the patch.  And in that end, I succeeded. (Thanks
Larry, Derek.) 

So anyway... moving right along...

--- Donald Sharp <sharpd@cisco.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 04, 2001 at 01:08:03PM -0700, Stephen Cameron wrote:
> > 
> > --- Donald Sharp <sharpd@cisco.com> wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jun 04, 2001 at 12:01:21PM -0700, Stephen Cameron wrote:
> > 
> > > > 
> > > > It prevents this mistake:
> > > > cvs tag -d sometag
> > > > "Oh crap, I meant to type someothertag!  sometag is my branch tag!!!
> > > ^C^C^C^C"
> > > 
> > > Your proposal doesn't stop this( adding another command line switch
> > > doesn't stop people from typing the wrong branch/tag name. ).
> > > There is nothing that can ever stop the accident from happening.
> > > 
> > My patch transforms the _consequence_ of the mistake from potentially
> > catastrophic unrecoverable branch tag loss into warning messages.
> That's fair.

Now we're getting somewhere.

> > 
> > However, it's clear that you believe people will, for some strange reason,
> > become accustomed to typing "cvs tag -d -b sometag" even when they don't
> need
> > "-b" 99.9999% of the time, thus reducing the effectiveness of the "-b" to
> > nothing.  
> Users do strange things, all the time.  part of my arguement was that they 
> are going to learn the -b behaviour and use it regardless.  And then
> your patch doesn't stop them anymore.

Yes, you can't make it fool-proof.  The fools are too clever. And here is where
I gather you would propose taking the sharp things away from those deemed by an
administrator to be especially foolish. (set up a permit/deny mapping between
users and cvs commands of some sort).  I'm not willing to take on that project

I am willing to try to change "cvs tag -d" and "cvs tag -F" distinguish in some
way between branch and non-branch tags.  (unless somebody beats me to it while
I sit here revising the sarcasm out of my emails... :-)
-- steve

Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35 
a year!  http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]