Second try, with an address that's actually subscribed. Apologies if you see this twice ...
On Mon, Feb 13, 2006 at 01:05:42PM +0100, Ludovic Courtès wrote: > > Wait. The current naming is not as ``principled'' as the one proposed > by Stefan, but it is *consistent*. Consistent?! Some commands are verb-noun, some are noun-verb, some are just noun and some are just verb. > If we were to switch to some other > naming scheme, we'd have to do it for each and every command name in > order to maintain consistency. So I think we should not pick up two > command names at random and change their names while leaving the rest > unchanged. ;-) I agree sort of, but you have to start somewhere. Can I suggest that we recognise all verb-noun commands as noun-verb and vice versa? I don't know *how* many times I've typed setup-archive, for instance. > As for the naming scheme, I find the current one quite nice in fact. It has a certain ineffable charm, like a dusty cottage in the woods. It's got a crooked chimney, nice lead glass windows, but it needs a bit of a clean-up. Matt _______________________________________________ Gnu-arch-users mailing list Gnu-arch-users@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-arch-users GNU arch home page: http://savannah.gnu.org/projects/gnu-arch/
