[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Gnu-arch-users] Re: GNU Arch status update
From: |
Miles Bader |
Subject: |
[Gnu-arch-users] Re: GNU Arch status update |
Date: |
Tue, 08 Feb 2005 17:03:39 +0900 |
Mikhael Goikhman <address@hidden> writes:
> It is possible that "move" should be re-aliased from "move-id" to "mv",
Yes
> however I think it is good to have this complete list of 5 commands:
>
> add (alias: add-id)
> delete (alias: delete-id)
> rm (alias: remove)
> mv (alias: move?, rename)
> move-id (alias: move?)
>
> I am not sure why people think aliases are bad. cvs and svn have a lot of
> them and feel no concern for this.
Aliases are not what's bad; what's bad is misleading and confusing names
for things. Like the current definitions of "move" and "delete" in tla.
A less confusing set of commmands would be:
rm (alias: remove?)
mv (alias: move, rename)
add-id (alias: add)
delete-id
move-id
As a matter of presentation, one can advertise "add" and "add-id" as
separate commands, even though they really do the same thing -- one
being for users, the other for scripts or something. Then:
add
rm (alias: remove?)
mv (alias: move, rename)
add-id
delete-id
move-id
For more consistency, it might be better to use "remove-id" instead of
"delete-id"; remove-id also seems slightly more accurate, in that
"remove-id" seems to emphasize the fact that you're removing the id from
_something_ (a file), whereas "delete-id" sounds like it's just removing
a particular id from the global pool of ids; one might expect a
"remove-id" command to take an id as an argument instead of a filename.
So:
add
rm (alias: remove?)
mv (alias: move, rename)
add-id
remove-id
move-id
-Miles
--
97% of everything is grunge
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] GNU Arch status update, (continued)
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] GNU Arch status update, Miles Bader, 2005/02/06
Message not available
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: [GNU-arch-dev] Re: GNU Arch status update, Mikhael Goikhman, 2005/02/07
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: [GNU-arch-dev] Re: GNU Arch status update, Tom Lord, 2005/02/07
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: [GNU-arch-dev] Re: GNU Arch status update, Mikhael Goikhman, 2005/02/07
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: [GNU-arch-dev] Re: GNU Arch status update, Tom Lord, 2005/02/07
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: [GNU-arch-dev] Re: GNU Arch status update, Tom Lord, 2005/02/07
Message not available[Gnu-arch-users] Re: [GNU-arch-dev] Re: Re: GNU Arch status update, Mikhael Goikhman, 2005/02/07
[Gnu-arch-users] Re: GNU Arch status update,
Miles Bader <=
[Gnu-arch-users] Re: [GNU-arch-dev] Re: GNU Arch status update, Mikhael Goikhman, 2005/02/08
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: [GNU-arch-dev] Re: GNU Arch status update, mlh, 2005/02/08
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: [GNU-arch-dev] Re: GNU Arch status update, conrad, 2005/02/07
Message not available[Gnu-arch-users] [BUG] Rethinking add, delete and move commands, Mikhael Goikhman, 2005/02/07
[Gnu-arch-users] Re: [GNU-arch-dev] [BUG] Rethinking add, delete and move commands, Tom Lord, 2005/02/07
[Gnu-arch-users] Re: [GNU-arch-dev] [BUG] Rethinking add, delete and move commands, Miles Bader, 2005/02/07
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: [GNU-arch-dev] [BUG] Rethinking add, delete and move commands, Dimitrie O. Paun, 2005/02/08
[Gnu-arch-users] Re: [GNU-arch-dev] [BUG] Rethinking add, delete and move commands., Gustavo Córdova Avila, 2005/02/08
[Gnu-arch-users] Re: [GNU-arch-dev] [BUG] Rethinking add, delete and move commands, Tom Lord, 2005/02/08
Message not available