On 31 Jul 2005 14:10:37 +0200, Matthieu Moy wrote: > > About limit, I finaly put only the ^, not the $, because otherwise, > limit can be used only to show one branch, which is never what you > want with browse. > > Do you prefer a prefix search or a full string search by default?
There are different cases depending on options, and I think the abrowse behaviour is very good. At least in the exact (non-regexp) mode. In another email you wrote: > That's what I did first, but actually, a full match is not very > meaningfull: You don't want to use [ar]browse to display a single > revision. It seems there is some misunderstanding. Please take abrowse as a model. It never gets a single revision as a limit. Limit is either version or branch or category or archive, depending on other options. You may even pass a more specific limit and abrowse will ignore the appropriate tail. > > If you want to remove "abrowse", does this mean you remove these options > > (that we use in the frontends) without providing alternatives: > > > > --categories, --branches, --versions > > I was hoping that no one would use those :-(. > > Since bazaar is going towards a flattened namespace, I thought they > would become useless in the future. rbrowse is already going in that > direction and does not display categories and branches individually, > but instead something like this: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > authinfo--main--0 > base-0 ... patch-2 > bazaar--a-test-for-file-history--1.5 > base-0 ... patch-2 > bazaar--abrowse-deprecated--1.5 > base-0 ... patch-4 > bazaar--archive-mirror--1.4 > base-0 ... patch-1 > bazaar--archive-mirror--1.5 Like I said, this needlesly spends slow network resources if someone only wants to see a list of versions (or dare I say, categories). > Anyway, if you want to see categories and branches, aren't "baz > categories" and "baz branches" more appropriate? It is just that these commands do not support all "abrowse" options. I am not against to combine all these commands into one main "browse". But I also don't see any problem to also have useful shortcut commands. > BTW, "browse" has a --versions option, but not with the same output > > I realize I should display this format only with --no-tree-view. Yes, I see the value in both views. > > these are needed to greately speed up the output and not needlesly > > traverse revision (patch-log) directories > > With tla 1.0 archives, yes. With baz flattened archives, it shouldn't > make any difference. To generate the "base-0 ... patch-399" line you should enter into every revision container directory. > -r Reverse patch logs Please restore --reverse. > --show-sealed Do not hide sealed branches This is a change in behaviour ((arguably serious). Since I want to use the old behaviour, some shortcut like -S may be nice. (Actually, I would rather use a more intuitive --all for this, but it is already taken...) > -m, --modified FILE Show revisions modifying FILE --affecting, --touching? I mean, are the file renames included here? > -k, --kind show each revision kind (import, changeset or id) s/id/tag/? > -C, --cacherevs show cached revisions > --desc implies -s -c -D -k -C Hmm, this last bit is a change in behaviour too. Regards, Mikhael. _______________________________________________ Gnu-arch-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-arch-users GNU arch home page: http://savannah.gnu.org/projects/gnu-arch/
