Re: [Gnu-arch-users] baz, --full option, revision lists: What's the best behavior?

[John A Meinel]

Matthieu Moy wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> baz missing removed the "-f, --full" option, and made it the default
> behavior. While this can be a good thing (I always used -f
> anyway ...), this makes it inconsistant with other commands displaying
> revision lists (baz revisions, baz logs, ...).
> 
> Shouldn't we apply the same change (remove -f and make it the default)
> to other bazaar commands? (I can do this myself, but I want opinions
> on this)
> 
> Thanks,
> 

Well, for 'logs' I like having just the patch name, since the rest is
just clutter. I already know what fully qualified version it is, so I
don't need it cluttering up the output. I would say the same thing about
revisions.

I'm not sure why for baz missing, but I wonder if it isn't because it is
more likely that you will be asking for revisions that are not in your
current tree. You rarely want to know what is missing from your branch,
more likely you want to know what someone else has done.

And possible baz is thinking that 'baz missing' (with no options) should
compare against a parent, or something like that, and they are preparing
for the change.

John
=:->

signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature