Thomas Moschny wrote:
> On Sunday 26 November 2006 22:29, Christian Boos wrote:
>
>> Jonas Borgström wrote:
>>
>>> I think get_preselected_paths sounds a bit weird, what was it called
>>> before?
>>>
>>> How about "get_quickjump_paths", "get_navigation_paths" or
>>> "get_bookmark_paths"?
>>>
>> Used to be: get_points_of_interest, get_special_locations ...
>> I'm OK for get_quickjump_paths. 'navigation' sounds too general and
>> 'bookmark' suggests something the user could configure (and that would
>> probably be a nice 2.0 idea ;) ).
>>
>
> Me personally, I'd vote against something containing 'path', because for
> other
> revision control backends (like those for mtn or hg), the subversion concept
> of branch/tag = path doesn't hold. What's wrong with 'points_of_interest'?
>
Yes, 'points_of_interest' was done with this neutral approach in mind,
things shouldn't need to be paths. But in the end I agreed with cmlenz,
it's a bit too vague ('interest' for who, for what?).
So I think I'll go for "get_quickjump_entries", which sounds generic
enough, a bit tied to the targeted UI but not too much.
-- Christian
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Trac Development" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/trac-dev?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
