Jason Dagit <[email protected]> writes:
> On Wed, Oct 7, 2009 at 10:47 PM, Trent W. Buck <[email protected]>wrote:
>
>> Warning: I am not pulling punches in this review. Please understand
>> this is a critique of the patch, not a personal attack on anybody.
>>
>>
> Same here. I have a few, extremely minor comments below.
>
>
>> > - "provide an explicit path to this program; otherwise the standard",
>> > - "locations /usr/sbin/sendmail and /usr/lib/sendmail will be tried."])
>> > + "provide an explicit path to this program. If `--sendmail-command'
>> is",
>> > + "not present, $SENDMAIL is used; if both are not present, the
>> standard",
>> > + "locations /usr/sbin/sendmail and /usr/lib/sendmail are used. (Other",
>>
>> What was the rationale for the rewording above?
>>
>
> As long as it's technically correct, I think the rewording is nice because
> it gives a clear picture of the order of defaulting.
Good point; it clarifies the first two, but muddies the second two. The
layout I used more recently is:
fileHelpAuthor :: [String]
fileHelpAuthor = [
"Each patch is attributed to its author, usually by email address (for",
"example, `Fred Bloggs <[email protected]>'). Darcs looks in several",
"places for this author string: the --author option, the files",
"_darcs/prefs/author (in the repository) and ~/.darcs/author (in your",
"home directory), and the environment variables $DARCS_EMAIL and",
"$EMAIL. If none of those exist, Darcs will prompt you for an author",
"string and write it to _darcs/prefs/author."]
i.e. "tries n things: first a, then b, then c, and finally d."
_______________________________________________
darcs-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
