On Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 09:08:19 -0600, zooko wrote: > I weakly object. Have any users experienced problems with the current > naming? Many users experienced problems with the *previous* naming, > because they would write "darcs rm" and it would say something "No such > command" and they would be confused and ask for help. But since we added > the stub that explains the important distinction between "rm foo" and > "darcs remove foo" I haven't heard any more complaints.
Ah, I see I forgot to give more context: http://bugs.darcs.net/issue1393 The motivations seems to be that it is clearer. Pasting what Trent commented in particular: | Though I'm a Unix user, I don't consider that an adequate reason for | "mv" to be the default. A non-negligible portion of our userbase are | on Windows and (presumably) do not think in terms of "mv". When a | user is looking through "darcs help", I think even Unix users will | generally look for "move" before they look for "mv". And if a Unix | user intuitively types "darcs mv", it will still work (because mv and | move stay synonymous). There is also this older discussion from the time you mentioned: http://bugs.darcs.net/issue127 > So I don't understand why to change what isn't broken, but if someone > else has a good reason, I don't object strongly enough to argue about > it. I can wait a little bit more... -- Eric Kow <http://www.nltg.brighton.ac.uk/home/Eric.Kow> PGP Key ID: 08AC04F9
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
