Re: "P" status from update

[Derek R. Price]

Larry Jones wrote:

> Yes, it probably would have saved a lot of confusion if "P" had never
> existed.  But it has, and the questions about it have mostly died down
> now.  I'm afraid that getting rid of it will just cause people who were
> used to the old behavior (and people using old versions of the
> documentation) to start asking why patch suddenly isn't working any

Yes, but it will be much easier for existing users to grasp that "P" has
disappeared in favor of "U" than it is for new users to assimilate the
difference.

As far as old documentation is concerned, with how little users seem to
care about "P", I can't imagine that a new user with old documentation
who never sees a "P" is going to worry about it.

> they mean the same thing -- the reason for two different codes is a
> technical detail that they don't need to worry about.

"Please ignore the man behind the curtain..."  ;)

This is mostly about what I've been going with lately, but I still think
the alternative would evoke less grumbling.

Besides, it's a little embarassing to introduce myself as one of the
maintainers of CVS and then have to explain about these little
easy-to-fix quirks that we ignore.  :)

Derek
-- 
Derek R. Price
CVS Solutions Architect
Ximbiot <http://ximbiot.com>
v: +1 717.579.6168
f: +1 717.234.3125
<derek@ximbiot.com>