On Mon, Oct 5, 2009 at 1:51 AM, Matt McCutchen wrote:
> Would you care to explain the impact of this change on the rsync I/O
> design in terms that I might understand? It looks like you merged two
> switch statements over possible message types, reducing code
> duplication, but that's all I can r
Matt McCutchen-7 wrote:
>
> On Wed, 2009-10-07 at 04:40 -0700, Martin Scharrer wrote:
>> I agree with both above points. However, I would also vote for adding
>> such
>> an option to rsync.
>> This should not be to difficult and would come in handy.
>
> I'm not convinced of the need for a --ta
