Ben Coburn <[email protected]> writes: >> Actually, I guess I feel that it should be possible to tell what the >> "common" options are by looking at the ones that have a short option >> (-f as well as --foo). How would people feel about a single option >> list per command, and sorting it? > > I think that most of us only use 3-4 options regularly for any given > command, through this varies per-person. Darcs is simple and easy to > use, however the options lists can be overwhelming to a new user. I > think we should continue to divide the lists of options into "common" > and "less commonly" used options. The trouble with relying on short > names is that not all "common" options have short names (--dry-run, > etc...).
I would (tentatively) argue that the actual bug in that case is that --dry-run doesn't have a short option. > I don't think the list should be sorted alphabetically. It is more > important to group options that are *semantically* related together. > For example, --union, --intersection, --compliment, should all be > listed next to each other! Hmm; I suppose it's always easier for the user to sort it (darcs help | sort) than to un-sort it (i.e. go back to the semantically ordered version)! >> For example, "darcs pull --help" would have the following. I already >> have an (ugly) patch to sort the options. Perhaps we should also >> simplify things by compressing the --foo and --no-foo or --dont-foo >> options, e.g. "--[no-]foo". Incidentally, why do we have both --no >> and --dont prefixes?! > > Yes, I think we should compress negated options to --[no-]foo and -- > [dont-]foo. Hopefully, this will make the options list visually easier > to read. The descriptions should probably be all for the positive > version of these options. Reported to the BTS as http://bugs.darcs.net/issue1291. _______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
