Re: [Gnu-arch-users] patch: automatic remove the corrupt revlib revision

[Stephen J. Turnbull]

>>>>> "Ludovic" == Ludovic Courtès <address@hidden> writes:

    Ludovic> I agree as well.  The "sporadic unexpected
    Ludovic> backup/restore" configuration which Matthieu described is
    Ludovic> probably not a very common case.  As such, it is not
    Ludovic> enough to motivate automatic deletion and recreation of
    Ludovic> revision libraries, IMO.

This is the same mistake Derek makes in reverse.

You see, *it already has motivated it, twice.* I don't recall whether
Matthieu said he had a script or whether he just says "oh gawd, not
again," and rebuilds the revlibs, but it's just as automatic as a
script.  Derek went to the trouble of writing and submitting a patch.
Their environments are not going to wake up and say "it got better"
someday.  That's pretty strong motivation, I think.

The question we should be trying to answer here is not "is it or isn't
it?", because it's *both* "is" and "isn't".  The question is can tla
meet both requirements?  Environment variable, something like that.
Runtime option, not compiletime.

(Personally, I'm somewhat opposed to catering to Derek's need at this
point, but a reasonable design supported by analysis would change my
mind.  Might even change Tom's. :-)

-- 
School of Systems and Information Engineering http://turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp
University of Tsukuba                    Tennodai 1-1-1 Tsukuba 305-8573 JAPAN
               Ask not how you can "do" free software business;
              ask what your business can "do for" free software.