Re: [Gnu-arch-users] "tla commit" generates a patch-set even if there are no changes

[Robert Widhopf-Fenk]

On Friday, May 14, 2004 at 08:07:38, Aaron Bentley wrote:
> Jani Monoses wrote:
> >>Perhaps you could explain why the defaults are unwise?  What's the
> >>harm in an accidental empty commit, aside from a little
> >>embarassment?
> > 
> > 
> > confusion of new users and mails to gau resulting in wasted time
> > overall.
> 
> Oh, I'd agree that it might be "surprising" or "annoying", but
> "unwise" seemed a bit strong to me.
> 
> Since tla witll never be very user-friendly anyway, 

Coming from CVS after a couple of days using TLA I have
gained the strong feeling that it is much more developer
friendly than CVS ;c)

After grunting a bit about the naming conventions and long
archive/category/branch/version/revision names I had
completion working in tcsh and found xtla.  I found the 10
commands out of the 104 I need for most of my daily work.
That was not different with CVS, usually I just used a small
subset of the available commands.  So I feel no urge to take
a closer look at SNV any more ;c) at least at the moment.

Robert