On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 7:20 PM, Jan Danielsson <jan.m.daniels...@gmail.com>wrote:
> Hello, > > It seems that some of those who are opposed to changing the behavior > of rm/mv are reaching a consensus that the names "rm" and "mv" were > poorly chosen, because they have a Unix connotation, and "rename" and > "move" has been suggested instead. So -- is there any reason we can't > have both? > > mv/rm - change to principle of least surprise > > move/remove - behaves like current mv/rm > > That way we all get what we want .. no? > We have had (for a long time) commands "delete" and "rename". "rm" is just an alias for "delete" and "mv" is an alias for "rename". It would not be that hard to change just "rm" to remove files from disk (if it is safe to do so) but leave "delete" as the current behavior. Seems like a reasonable suggestion. > > -- > Kind regards, > Jan Danielsson > > _______________________________________________ > fossil-users mailing list > fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org > http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users > -- D. Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org
_______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
