[Gnu-arch-users] Re: Newbie confusion "illegal revision name"

[Andrew Wilcox]

Aaron Bentley wrote:
> I don't understand why you prefer an error message to having it just
> work.  "tla changes patch-3" is a much more convenient way of expressing
> the command, and its intent is quite clear.

Your suggestion that tla be enhanced to do what I wanted was so
obviously wonderful that I neglected to say anything.  My apologies.

Yes, to implement "tla changes patch-3" is a wonderful idea.


Zenaan Harkness wrote:
> he's implying (AIUI) "short of having a solution/patch available
> now, the error message would be better changed"

Yes.

Yet I don't think it is either/or.

Even if Aaron's wonderful suggestion is implemented, I will still be
able to enter a invalid revision name.  If the error message were
changed to something that I would have understood, that would be a
significant improvement to my new user experience.

As a new user, I read the tutorial, look at the on-line help, read the
wiki, and then try some things.  As I try things, I will get error
messages, and whether I understand them makes an important difference
to how quickly I can climb the learning curve.

Aaron Bentley suggested:
> The corrected version would be "not a valid revision name", which
> isn't very different from "illegal revision name".

Sometimes small differences can make a big difference in the user
experience.

I judge that if -- in that moment of being a new user, knowing what I
knew then -- tla had printed "not a valid revision name", there is a
50% chance that I would have understood what was wrong and avoided an
hour of fustration.

Thank you,

Andrew Wilcox