+1 from me too. > -----Original Message----- > From: Stefan Bodewig [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 27 April 2004 13:33 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: use of canonical in <import> > > > On Tue, 27 Apr 2004, Peter Reilly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Basicly the issue is whether to canonicalize the imported > file name or > > to use the absolute path. > > > > Jesse makes a good point for using the absolute path. The > problem is > > that this is a incompatible change. > > Yep, he found similar problems in 1.3 (that's what he's > talking about in the paragraph starting with "Historically") > and at that time we (not just me, I just committed the > change) decided to break backwards compatibility and state it > in WHATSNEW. > > The main reason was, and I think it applies now as well, is > that you usually can get whatever you gain via > canonicalization in a different way (the different symlinking > strategy he points you to) but there is no stable workaround > against canonicalization. > > +1 for breaking bwc. > > Stefan > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
