I have to agree with Larry. Of all my sites, only very rarely do I ever use revisions at all. I don't use them, need them, or want any of the overhead required for storing and maintaining them. -1 for requiring them always. +1 if we default to using revisions but provide some means of saying "revisions off" as Larry describes. On 7 Jun, 2007, at 13:16, Larry Garfield wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jun 2007 10:58:03 -0700, Derek Wright <drupal@dwwright.net> wrote:
On Jun 7, 2007, at 6:30 AM, Moshe Weitzman wrote:
yes, i think the time has come for automatically tracking revisions. +1
+1 to always requiring revisions (did anyone honestly expect Mr. Revision Control to think otherwise?). ;)
so, next step: diff.module in core? if we're going to force revisions all the time, shouldn't core have a better UI for displaying them?
-derek
There are cases where I don't want revisions at all. Maybe I don't want a paper-trail. :-)
If the code is considerably simpler if revisions are required, then I would say we should also consider it a requirement that we have auto-trimming of revisions in core, per node type, (only keep the last X revisions of node type Y), and document that setting it to 0 will have "no revisions saved". That becomes the new alternative way of saying "revisions off", but has cleaner code.
--Larry Garfield