gnu-arch-users
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

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


From: Mikhael Goikhman
Subject: Re: [Gnu-arch-users] baz, --full option, revision lists: What's the best behavior?
Date: Tue, 24 May 2005 18:12:04 +0000
User-agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i

On 24 May 2005 08:38:38 +1000, Robert Collins wrote:
> 
> We did it for baz missing so that when folk do the fairly natural
> thing : baz missing [branch] | baz cat-archive-log, it works. revisions
> is much less likely to be piped wholesale, ditto for logs.

First, "baz missing" ui was changed in 1.1 and such pipe still does not
work in 1.3, so what was the reason to break things is totally unclear.
Second, I don't think it is more natural than: tla missing -f | xargs -n1
tla cat-archive-log. I also prefer --pipe option (or "-" argument) for
such things rather than autodetecting stdin. And it would be nice to
have "missing --desc" shortcut for consistency, that should often
eliminate the need for the pipe above.

> That said, it would be nicer to be consistent IMO.

I think "missing" may default to short names, since it only works on one
version. Commands that may print more than one version are different.

[I had similar doubts and switched to --full default in 'axp annotate'
and 'axp history', because they cross versions. On the other hand,
'axp changelog' uses short names by default, unless --ancestry is given
and there is actually more than one version in the output. I am thinking
to have both --full and --no-full in such one-version-plus commands.]

Regards,
Mikhael.




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]