Re: [Monotone-devel] restrictions: disabling recursion

[Richard Levitte]

In message <address@hidden> on Tue, 19 Feb 2008 18:26:23 -0500, "Zack Weinberg" 
<address@hidden> said:

zackw> You've run afoul of this, I think:
zackw> 
zackw>   // FIXME: this uses depth+1 because the old semantics of depth=0 were
zackw>   // something like "the current directory and its immediate children". 
it
zackw>   // seems somewhat more reasonable here to use depth=0 to mean "exactly
zackw>   // this directory" and depth=1 to mean "this directory and its 
immediate
zackw>   // children"
zackw> 
zackw> The "old" behavior has been preserved in the name of backward
zackw> compatibility.  I'd have no objection to calling a flag day and
zackw> introducing the more sensible semantics you suggest (which are the
zackw> same as the ones suggested in the restrictions.cc comments).  What do
zackw> other people think?

I have no problem with that in itself.  Perhaps one should consider
renaming --depth to something else, so the change becomes more
blatant.  I don't have any other name in mind right now, but it's
something to think of...

Cheers,
Richard

-----
Please consider sponsoring my work on free software.
See http://www.free.lp.se/sponsoring.html for details.

-- 
Richard Levitte                         address@hidden
                                        http://richard.levitte.org/

"When I became a man I put away childish things, including
 the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up."
                                                -- C.S. Lewis