Sergey Organov <sorganov@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > My point is that the story with -c, or --cc is roughly the same, and > that you yourself fixed --cc once upon a time to imply -p, so it's > especially confusing for me that you are now in opposition to similar > change to "-m". I think we all saw a good explanation for that already in the thread. The mistake by "--cc" was fixed relatively quickly, but it is now way too late to change the behaviour of "-m" without hurting existing users. I think I've wasted enough time on this in this thread already, so let's stop comparing --cc and -m now. Thanks.
