Re: vc-status vs pcl-cvs

[Sam Steingold]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Dan Nicolaescu wrote:
| Stefan Monnier <address@hidden> writes:
|   > Yes, a command we absolutely need anyway: vc-pull.

Yay!

| We do need the vc-pull command, but we don't need it for CVS _by
default_.
| Sure, it could be used for CVS, but that is not the normal workflow for
| CVS, so it would just confuse our users.   And while the implementation
| of vc-cvs-stay-local is trivial, vc-pull is not.

Now I am confused.
I thought that vc-pull would do
cvs up
hg pull -u (and if necessary hg merge && hg ci -m merge)
&c, i.e., sync my local tree with the remote one.
this is what I get when I hit "O" in pcl-cvs and
this is what I am sorely missing in vc-dir.
this is a part of my normal workflow in both hg and cvs because this is
what I have to do before commit (in cvs) or push (in hg).
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFISBUfPp1Qsf2qnMcRArQ/AKCtVQjYMotcsh84346nhXcaC8oJEQCeIyZh
DbkFPnxHCelRvMLLoB3se34=
=013U
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----