On 07/03/13 06:31, Dan McGee wrote: > On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 2:19 PM, William Giokas <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Tue, Mar 05, 2013 at 02:03:14AM +0100, Sébastien Luttringer wrote: >>> The main (only) purpose of -D is to be able to change packages installation >>> status (deps or explicit). Having a short form offer a similar experience >>> that >>> other main pacman option (e.g. Su). >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Sébastien Luttringer <[email protected]> >> >> The --asdeps option for -S and -U does not have a shortopt. In my >> worthess opinion, this is a bad idea, as -d for those operations is >> --nodeps. > > This was my thought as well. If we are willing to use a shortopt, it > should apply to ALL top-level operations in the same fashion (or be > rejected completely), and not mislead. -Q/--query match this criteria, > but currently -d for -U/-S would be totally unexpected. So -1 from me. > > I have consciously made decisions over the past 3 years to not add new > shortopts unless they are universally applicable, so this would be a > step against that. If we were to do this, we would want to remove the > -d shortopt for --nodeps in the next release, and then add these in > the following release. However, this is cumbersome as `--nodeps > --nodeps` is really silly to type out as we allow this option to be > passed twice for even more dep-ignoring behavior. >
I made the decision to take this based on: 1) it would be good to have a short options 2) the short letters made sense 3) the current usage of -d/-e in -Q is fairly similar 4) the current usage of -d in -S is an operation that is unrelated to -D so will not cause confusion. People manage to understand that -Sd is different from -Qd. Why the need to enforce consistency when there is already none? Allan
