On Thu, Feb 09, 2006 at 10:42:19PM +, Jamie Webb wrote:
I would suggest darcs forget.
-1
Darcs will not forget the file. It just won't track any further
changes. In particular, 'forget' fails to indicate that the file will
be removed from any /other/ repo to which the patch is
On Thu, Feb 09, 2006 at 10:53:02AM +0100, Joeri van Ruth wrote:
On Thu, Feb 02, 2006 at 10:30:17PM +0100, Albert Reiner wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED], Thu, 02 Feb 2006 14:30:42 -0400]:
As for darcs remove, it might be best to eliminate that command,
or at least to hide it in the section that
[Olivier Thauvin [EMAIL PROTECTED], Sat, 4 Feb 2006 02:21:49 +0100]:
Notice rollback does not apply currently to your working copy, I
sent patches about this and I am waiting feedback from devel
list. So currently you have to:
darcs rollback
darcs revert
to fully apply the change.
But
[Nigel Rowe [EMAIL PROTECTED], Sat, 4 Feb 2006 09:10:07 +1100]:
Hmmm, maybe it should be renamed unadd?
Actually I'm only half joking here, as it would remove any confusion of
does darcs remove == rm?
Actually, I also thought that unadd would have been a better name. In
general, however,
As for darcs remove, it might be best to eliminate that command,
or at least to hide it in the section that we reserve for commands
that are unnecessary and that sometimes confuse newcomers.
Please don't eliminate! Not only would that break backward
compatibility, it is also a very
If you want all your commands in 2 characters like *nix then use the
'alias' command and make you own. Thats what its for. Consistency is a
key item in user understanding and usability.
That reminds me, that in fact darcs commands are much shorter for me:
MAIM yumyum:~$ type dw
dw is a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Saturday 04 February 2006 01:38, Olivier Thauvin wrote:
Le Vendredi 03 Février 2006 15:27, [EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit :
As for darcs remove, it might be best to eliminate that
command, or at least to hide it in the section that we reserve
On Fri, Feb 03, 2006 at 10:27:21AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Don't worry, I'm sure that darcs remove will live a long time, if only
because of backwards compatibility. Could you please tell us what you use it
for? Why don't you just delete the file in question instead?
I use it because
On Sat, Feb 04, 2006 at 09:10:07AM +1100, Nigel Rowe wrote:
Hmmm, maybe it should be renamed unadd?
Actually I'm only half joking here, as it would remove any confusion of
does darcs remove == rm?
actually, I sort of like this. it would have saved me some trouble when I was
first starting
John Meacham wrote:
I use it because I saw it existed so assumed it was the proper way to
delete files. I only learned you could just delete them when I
accidentally used 'mv' instead of 'darcs mv' and it recorded the patch
as deteting the original file.
Hmmm. I was unaware of this as well.
I tripped over this many times too -- perhaps we should just also allow
move in parallel with mv.
Since several people have this issue, then perhaps this means that the current
motivation for the name of mv isn't an important one. Perhaps it is okay if
the darcs equivalent of unix mv is
On 2006-02-02, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Perhaps it is okay if
the darcs equivalent of unix mv is spelled move.
No, it isn't.
As for darcs remove, it might be best to eliminate that command,
If consistency is wanted, rather rename 'remove' to 'rm' than 'mv' to
'move'.
--
Perhaps it is okay if
the darcs equivalent of unix mv is spelled move.
No, it isn't.
Why? Would users be confused because they expect darcs to have unix-style
command names and when they try darcs mv it doesn't work? I rather doubt it
-- darcs mv is the only unix-style command!
On 2006-02-02, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It appears that the name darcs mv is an exception from the normal darcs
command-name style
So what? I like and want unix-style commands where applicable.
Do I have to wrap this part of darcs as well as I already have to
wrap dates to
Am Donnerstag, 2. Februar 2006 22:43 schrieb Tuomo Valkonen:
On 2006-02-02, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It appears that the name darcs mv is an exception from the normal darcs
command-name style
So what? I like and want unix-style commands where applicable.
But maybe other
On 2006-02-02, Wolfgang Jeltsch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So what? I like and want unix-style commands where applicable.
But maybe other people have a different taste. Although I nearly always work
with UNIX-style systems, I don't think that it's a good idea to have
UNIX-like darcs
Tuomo Valkonen wrote:
So what? That doesn't change that unix-like commands are an excellent
choice. 'darcs mo' is very unintuitive, and 'darcs move' is much longer
than 'darcs mv'.
Much longer? A whopping _2_ characters!
I touch type and my fingers type what I think virutally
On 2006-02-03, Richard A. Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Much longer? A whopping _2_ characters!
It's a lot when one's used to typing 'mv'. And it's counterintuitive
to use a completely different command in a darcs repository than outside
on.
I touch type and my fingers type what I think
Tuomo Valkonen wrote:
It's a lot when one's used to typing 'mv'. And it's counterintuitive
to use a completely different command in a darcs repository than
outside on.
That actually does has a bit of merit. But it its canceled by the other
platform where it's not completely different.
On 2006-02-03, Richard A. Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But I don't 'mv' an object on my desk I 'move' it. You don't go and
'cp' something on the copier.
Well, I 'siirrän' (1st person singular form of the verb 'siirtää' that has
the singular imperative form 'siirrä' suitable for commands)
20 matches
Mail list logo
