[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [Gnu-arch-users] get-patch/show-changeset -> inconsistent or no?

From: Tom Lord
Subject: Re: [Gnu-arch-users] get-patch/show-changeset -> inconsistent or no?
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 09:28:35 -0700 (PDT)

    > From: Robert Anderson <address@hidden>

    > On Thu, 2003-09-18 at 06:23, Tom Lord wrote:

    > >     > From: Robert Anderson <address@hidden>

    > >     > In order to look at a patch, you do:

    > >     > tla get-patch [revision]
    > >     > tla show-changeset [dir]

    > >     > Is that an inconsistency, 

    > > Yes, sort of.

    > > I guesss you could say that it's short for "patch level" but 
    > > it should probably be called/aliased "get-changeset".

    > Hmm.  Does that mean patch-logs should now be called changeset-logs? 
    > And delta-patch should be delta-changeset?  And the 'help' sections
    > should be 'Changset Commands' and 'Changeset Log Commands'?  And the
    > help for logs, add-log, remove-log, log-ls, changelog, new-merges,
    > whats-missing, and sync-tree should be changed?

    > I'm inclined to say don't bother, but rather go back to the consistent
    > 'patch' terminology.  'changeset' is multisyllabic and clunky sounding,
    > I think.

So, 'show-patch'.

Perhaps.  It seems like a minor issue.

Mostly I'm skeptical that perfect terminological consistency in this
area would actually be an improvement.   It might, instead, just lead
to a kind of cognative overload (if it's always "foo-patch" and
"patch-foo" and "foo-patch-bar" then the "patch" part winds up just
being noise).


reply via email to

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