[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Gnu-arch-users] Re: -L option for tag?
From: |
Robert Anderson |
Subject: |
[Gnu-arch-users] Re: -L option for tag? |
Date: |
18 Sep 2003 21:59:15 -0700 |
On Thu, 2003-09-18 at 21:30, Miles Bader wrote:
> Robert Anderson <address@hidden> writes:
> > Two of them take a -L, --log-message option. tag doesn't. It
> > should, shouldn't it?
>
> I suppose, though it seems less likely that people will use it than
> with the others, as the automatic message is usually good enough.
For ordinary versions, I'd agree it's less likely (although probably
worth having anyway). But what about "tag versions"? I think it makes
all kinds of sense in that context.
Bob
- [Gnu-arch-users] -L option for tag?, Robert Anderson, 2003/09/19
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: -L option for tag?, Miles Bader, 2003/09/19
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: -L option for tag?,
Robert Anderson <=
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: -L option for tag?, Robert Anderson, 2003/09/19
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: -L option for tag?, Miles Bader, 2003/09/19
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: -L option for tag?, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2003/09/19
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: -L option for tag?, Tom Lord, 2003/09/19
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: -L option for tag?, Miles Bader, 2003/09/19
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: -L option for tag?, Tom Lord, 2003/09/19
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: -L option for tag?, Tom Lord, 2003/09/19
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: -L option for tag?, Robert Collins, 2003/09/19
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: -L option for tag?, Tom Lord, 2003/09/19
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: -L option for tag?, Robert Collins, 2003/09/19