Re: Customizing the VC backend order

[Stephen J. Turnbull]

Stefan Monnier writes:

 > Hmm... that's interesting to know (I'm considering changing the way the
 > search is done, which would naturally tend to give precedence to backends
 > whose admin dir is closest, so CVS would then tend to unavoidably take
 > precedence since it's always as close as any other).

This is very bad IMO, as if multiple systems are in use, CVS is almost
always a legacy distribution system.

Also, what about the RCS use-case where the ,v file is a sibling of
the controlled file?  That's even closer, and even worse!

While I see the logic behind your suggestion, I think what should be
done is to ask the user.  For one thing, I can see a use case where
you are maintaining a variant version of an external library as a
subdirectory of your project.  In that case, your changes should
normally be managed by the higher level SCM, and the local SCM will be
pull-from-upstream only, until your patches get accepted.