[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Gnu-arch-users] Re: tagline considered harmful?
From: |
Jan Hudec |
Subject: |
[Gnu-arch-users] Re: tagline considered harmful? |
Date: |
Wed, 27 Aug 2003 10:51:17 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.4i |
On Wed, Aug 27, 2003 at 10:48:48AM +0900, Miles Bader wrote:
> Tom Lord <address@hidden> writes:
> > I prefer that it not be the default, but a --forward option to various
> > merging commands would be fine.
>
> Could it use a different name that `--forward', though? I find
> the name --forward confusing enough with patch, which is pretty
> low-level, but I think it would be even more odd in a higher-level
> context like arch.
>
> Something nice and obvious like `--ignore-patch-duplicates' or
> something would be nice.
>
> BTW, patch -N leaves around .rej files for rejected duplicates, without
> any obvious indication that's what they are; I'm not sure whether that's
> the right thing or not for arch...
It does not look like the right thing to me.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jan 'Bulb' Hudec
<address@hidden>
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] tagline considered harmful?, (continued)
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] tagline considered harmful?, Tom Lord, 2003/08/23
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: tagline considered harmful?, Stig Brautaset, 2003/08/23
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: tagline considered harmful?, Ethan Benson, 2003/08/23
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: tagline considered harmful?, Jonathan Walther, 2003/08/24
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: tagline considered harmful?, Jan Hudec, 2003/08/25
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: tagline considered harmful?, Miles Bader, 2003/08/26
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: tagline considered harmful?, Jan Hudec, 2003/08/26
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: tagline considered harmful?, Tom Lord, 2003/08/26
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: tagline considered harmful?, Miles Bader, 2003/08/26
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: tagline considered harmful?,
Jan Hudec <=