Hi, yes there is. I switched from 7.0.243 to 7.1a to get rid of the patches and the code involved with appending & applying them. However, such beta releases happen seldom and I'll have to go back to applying the patches again once new ones are out. I plan on waiting for 7.1. to be final, then I'll split up vim into vim and vim-devel, so that vim-users aren't *forced* to go bleeding-edge. I might switch from release+patches to snapshots however, so the .baks' contents might or might not become obsolete eventually - I can't tell yet. For the time being I found it reasonable to keep them; they will be removed as soon as 7.1 is out. Regards, Elias On May 10, 2007, at 12:12 AM, Blair Zajac wrote:

Hello,

In r24980, is there a reason to keep the *.bak files in Subversion?

http://trac.macports.org/projects/macports/changeset/24980

Regards, Blair

On May 10, 2007, at 1:42 AM, Blair Zajac wrote:

Isn't the point of svn is not needing those files? You can always get them back, even if they were deleted. You can also copy in svn from older revisions to get those files.

svn cp -r 1234 path1 path2

So I don't really see the point of separate files. If we weren't using svn and no version control, then yes, bak files are necessary.

Doing that requires more work, as you have to go back and find where it came from. There's no cost involved in keeping the .bak files aside from a few more kB downloaded, which is practically nothing. -- Kevin Ballard http://kevin.sb.org eridius@macports.org http://www.tildesoft.com