Max Battcher <[email protected]> writes: > Trent W. Buck wrote: >> Ashley Moran <[email protected]> writes: >> >>> Hi all >>> >>> I just re-stumbled across the darcs Rosetta Stone[1]. What I hadn't >>> noticed before was the section "Recommendations for unification": >>> >>> • rename get to clone >>> • rename changes to log >>> • rename record to commit (DVCS are popular enough now) >>> • rename rollback to new "repeal" >> >> I'll add one: >> >> darcs status --hidden alias for--> darcs whatsnew > > +1 for a ``darcs status`` hidden alias. That seems reasonable and I > know it has tripped up people from other SCSes. I'm mostly opposed to > renaming ``darcs get`` and ``darcs changes``, but clone and log > (respectively) are fine for hidden aliases.
On reflection, I think "darcs status" would be better as an alias for "whatsnew -s" rather than exactly "whatsnew". > The most useful other alias I can think of would be ``darcs info`` as > a hidden alias for ``darcs show repo``. (Similar to ``svn info``, > which apparently is a relatively common svn command for me. I've never > mistakenly tried ``darcs info``, myself, but I have learned that > neither hg nor git provide an info command either.) I don't think we should add aliases that only one VCS uses. I think we SHOULD add aliases if many/most other VCSs have a de facto consensus on how that command should behave -- and "clone", "commit" and "status" seem to fall into that category. _______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
