From owner-svn-src-head@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jan 2 06:52:41 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-src-head@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5081B1065670 for ; Fri, 2 Jan 2009 06:52:41 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dougb@FreeBSD.org) Received: from mail2.fluidhosting.com (mx22.fluidhosting.com [204.14.89.5]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBCEE8FC12 for ; Fri, 2 Jan 2009 06:52:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dougb@FreeBSD.org) Received: (qmail 20743 invoked by uid 399); 2 Jan 2009 06:52:40 -0000 Received: from localhost (HELO lap.dougb.net) (dougb@dougbarton.us@127.0.0.1) by localhost with ESMTPAM; 2 Jan 2009 06:52:40 -0000 X-Originating-IP: 127.0.0.1 X-Sender: dougb@dougbarton.us Message-ID: <495DB9B6.4030801@FreeBSD.org> Date: Thu, 01 Jan 2009 22:52:38 -0800 From: Doug Barton Organization: http://www.FreeBSD.org/ User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.18 (X11/20081128) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Maxim Sobolev References: <200901011055.n01AtQaN052763@svn.freebsd.org> <495DB15B.8040908@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <495DB15B.8040908@FreeBSD.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.7 OpenPGP: id=D5B2F0FB Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: svn-src-head@FreeBSD.org, svn-src-all@FreeBSD.org, src-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: svn: head/usr.sbin/mergemaster X-BeenThere: svn-src-head@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SVN commit messages for the src tree for head/-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 02 Jan 2009 06:52:41 -0000 Maxim Sobolev wrote: > Doug Barton wrote: >> Author: dougb >> Date: Thu Jan 1 10:55:26 2009 >> New Revision: 186677 >> URL: http://svn.freebsd.org/changeset/base/186677 >> >> Log: >> Revert 184781, 184804, and 184832 (automatic installation of files >> that differ only by VCS Id) for the following reasons: >> 1. It was added without my consent, review, or even a heads up > > Huh? I sent you request for review on 24 October 2008 If that's the case then I apologize, I've been extremely overloaded lately and it's possible that this fell through the cracks. My other objections remain however, including the one about the -U option being a better solution that requires no new code. Doug -- This .signature sanitized for your protection