Subject: bug#12492: vc-dir vs. vc-root-dir

From: Ivan Shmakov <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2015 20:55:11 +0000

>>>>> Dmitry Gutov <[email-masked]> writes:

[…]

 > 2) For almost all backends we can easily deduce the repository root
 > directory (exceptions: cvs, rcs, sccs), and I believe that in almost
 > all cases the user wants to see the status of this directory, not of
 > some subdirectory or any directory unrelated to the current buffer.
 > Hence the function vc-root-dir, which I think should be bound to 'C-x
 > v d' and the respective menu item.  In the rare case when the user
 > need to do something unusual, they can do M-x vc-dir.

	We already have at least two pairs of commands (C-x v l vs.
	C-x v L /and/ C-x v = vs. C-x v D), of which one operates on the
	current file /and/ the other on the repository as a whole.

	Is there any good reason we can’t have a similar arrangement for
	vc-dir (C-x v d) and the proposed vc-root-dir command (say,
	C-x v /, – where ‘/’ is a kind of obvious mnemonic for “root”)?

	I find it way better than f302475471df, as it both keeps the
	current behavior for C-x v d for those who may still want it
	/and/ it offers a /prompt-free/ shortcut for those who’d always
	want to use vc-dir on the root.

 > When the backend doesn't have the function vc-xx-root, vc-root-dir
 > interactively delegates to vc-dir, so for CVS, for example, the
 > behavior will not change.

	That’s certainly sensible, too.

[…]

-- 
FSF associate member #7257  http://boycottsystemd.org/  … 3013 B6A0 230E 334A