On Fri, 2012-05-04 at 21:50 +0200, Tuncer Ayaz wrote: > Hi guys, > > wrt https://github.com/haskell/cabal/pull/2 , I didn't comment there > as there seems to be a consensus on "fork". > > Still, I'd like to question that decision given that "fork" for me > at least carries too much of a "publish an alternative version > with changes" meaning. > > Would fetch or checkout or grab or fetch-scm or something > not be more precise terminology wise?
Andres and I discussed this the other day. I think our consensus was to use 'get' and to have that also work for tarballs (like the current 'unpack'). We didn't discuss in detail what a 'get' command would look like, e.g. how to say you want to get the scm version rather than the tarball version. Duncan _______________________________________________ cabal-devel mailing list cabal-devel@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/cabal-devel
