https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2240
------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-01-15 14:47 ------- Ops, yes, you're right. Sorry, my fault in assuming the whole time that we want to use the usual "out to in" way of describing the include/exclude list. Certainly a wrong assumption from my side. Yes, you're fully right: if we open our mind and also accept "in to out" descriptions (although I find them less intuitive) the "first match" approach is fully sufficient and as powerful, too. Remains just the questions how many people find "out to in" and how many "in to out" descriptions more "natural". I'm a clear fan of "out to in" thinking when it comes to rsync, because the whole rsync command is a "synchronize this tree" command plus a few include/exclude options covering the inside of the tree. And it's the way one is also used to from mostly all modern ACL implementations I know of. But that's just my point of view. I don't know what people prefer more. Perhaps that's the reason why we shouldn't try to merge "first match" and "last match" approaches in rsync, because one is more suitable for "in to out" and the other for "out to in" descriptions. Hence both have their right to exist IMHO. And by keeping "first match" as the default, rsync also doesn't have any backward compatibility problems. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.samba.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. -- To unsubscribe or change options: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync Before posting, read: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
