Re: VC state

[Dan Nicolaescu]

Stefan Monnier <address@hidden> writes:

  > >> >> - there should be a way to operate on (sub)directories.
  > >> 
  > >> > You mean something more than M-x vc-status DIR/SUBDIR RET ?
  > >> 
  > >> Yes.  There's sometimes an important difference between passing "src/"
  > >> as the argument vs passing all the files in "src/" that appear in the
  > >> vc-status (beside the fact that the former does not require you to
  > >> first mark each one of those files).
  > 
  > > Many VC commands choke when given a directory parameter, so this does
  > > not seem particularly useful at this time.
  > 
  > > More, given that vc-status is still "experimental code", and there is no
  > > clear path/criteria on getting it out of that state, I am not inclined
  > > to put more effort in adding more features to it.
  > 
  > I don't see it as particularly experimental: it's what I now use as
  > a replacement for PCL-CVS when I use Bzr.

So can the experimental label be removed then?
How about binding vc-status to C-x v d so that it gets more exposure?
What is the plan for vc-dired?
When can it be removed?
IMO it does not make sense to keep code for two different
implementations of the same thing, it just adds complexity to the code.