Still not sure I get how extensions work. Is the idea that each extension claims a top-level character? This seems like a pretty small namespace. Or do we go with a single top-level char that opens an extension menu?
On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 9:21 AM, Óscar Fuentes <[email protected]> wrote: > Yann Hodique <[email protected]> > writes: > > >> The idea is to have a key for each group of conceptually similar git > >> commands. There is `l' for all log-related commands, for instance. When > >> you press that key, a menu showing often-used command variants (short > >> log, long log, reflog, etc) and options (--grep, --all, etc) is shown. > > > > sounds great ! > > So if I understand correctly, there would be no required modification > > for the way git-svn works for example (as it already has the 'N' > > prefix). > > Right. The only caveat is that the options shown along with a group of > commands (such as git-svn's) possibly does make sense for all of them: > after pressing `N' you see a menu containing the commands svn-commit, > svn-rebase, etc plus a series of options such as --no-rebase and > --local. Of course --no-rebase does not apply to svn-rebase, and it is > expected that the user knows that so he doesn't pick-up --no-rebase for > executing svn-rebase (which would end with git failing, which is not a > big issue anyways.) > > [snip] > >
