[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: C-x v g going further back in time?
From: |
Stefan Monnier |
Subject: |
Re: C-x v g going further back in time? |
Date: |
Mon, 26 Jan 2004 14:28:00 GMT |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.3.50 |
> 1) the *vc* buffer is used both for 'C-x v l' and also when you do
> 'C-x v v' to commit a file, so it might contain either info that
It can also be used for another file. I think we just need to add
a variable that stores the "it's a log" info, along the one that stores the
file's name.
> 2) cache coherency problem. What if the log info is updated b/c of
> new commits? Do you always want the outdated log info?
I wouldn't worry too much about it. If the commits are done via VC,
they'll overwrite the *vc* buffer so it's safe. And even if it somehow
does not happen, it's rather unlikely that the user will be bothered by the
lack of some brand new commits: when using vc-annotate you're typically
looking at past changes. And you can always add a `revert-buffer-function'
such that the user can refresh explicitly the log info.
Stefan
- C-x v g going further back in time?, Benjamin Rutt, 2004/01/08
- Re: C-x v g going further back in time?, Andrew Taylor, 2004/01/08
- Re: C-x v g going further back in time?, Benjamin Rutt, 2004/01/08
- Re: C-x v g going further back in time?, Stefan Monnier, 2004/01/08
- Re: C-x v g going further back in time?, Benjamin Rutt, 2004/01/20
- Re: C-x v g going further back in time?, Stefan Monnier, 2004/01/20
- Re: C-x v g going further back in time?, Benjamin Rutt, 2004/01/25
- Re: C-x v g going further back in time?,
Stefan Monnier <=
- Re: C-x v g going further back in time?, Benjamin Rutt, 2004/01/26
- Re: C-x v g going further back in time?, Stefan Monnier, 2004/01/26
- Re: C-x v g going further back in time?, Stefan Monnier, 2004/01/26
Re: C-x v g going further back in time?, Benjamin Rutt, 2004/01/11