On Tue, Oct 24, 2006 at 07:05:42PM -0700, Bill Shannon wrote:
> Stephen Lau wrote:
> >Bill Shannon wrote:
> >
> >>John Levon wrote:
> >>
> >>>On Tue, Oct 24, 2006 at 03:44:03PM -0700, Bill Shannon wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>There seems to be no equivalent to the "-n" options to bringover
> >>>>and putback.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>hg outgoing and hg incoming.
> >>
> >>
> >>Ah ha! Any chance we could get -n options to push and pull, since the
> >>functionality is clearly there?
> >
> >
> >No, please don't... this is the wrong thing to do. It's adding a new
> >flag to duplicate functionality that already exists in its regular
> >command set.
> >
> >We would never allow this in a Sun developed tool (certainly not in
> >Solaris anyway).
>
> I've been on the other side of this argument so I know where you're
> coming from ("cat -z", anyone?), but I've gotten over it.
>
> See my earlier message about training thousands of users.
>
> Mercurial already has "pull -u", why not "pull -n"?
Because "pull -u" does something new in that it combines two shorter
steps (hg pull && hg update). Whereas 'pull -n' is nothing more than an
alias for 'incoming'.
I think that with the larger task of training thousands of users to wrap
their heads around Mercurial's changeset model versus SCCS file deltas,
little things like 'hg incoming' instead of 'bringover -n' are well..
trivial.
I don't think people are expecting a magical identical mappings.
Mercurial is not Teamware. If they can learn to type 'hg' instead of
'bringover', then they can learn 'hg incoming' instead of 'bringover -n'
cheers,
steve
around the changeset model
--
stephen lau // [EMAIL PROTECTED] | 650.786.0845 | http://whacked.net
opensolaris // solaris kernel development
_______________________________________________
tools-discuss mailing list
tools-discuss@opensolaris.org
