[Top][All Lists]

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

[Gnu-arch-users] Re: UI change proposal: logs vs. log-ls

From: Miles Bader
Subject: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: UI change proposal: logs vs. log-ls
Date: 19 Sep 2003 16:34:38 +0900

Pau Aliagas <address@hidden> writes:
> > > When I type tla logs I expect to see the list of logs of the different 
> > > branches--versions, as currently happens.
> > You are apparently using a different version of tla then, because
> > that's not what `tla logs' does right now.  That's what I want to
> > change -- I _want_ `tla logs' to print a list of logs.
> I'm using the one based on patch-168, released 2 days ago :)
> Inside a project tree this is what I get:
> $ tla logs   
> address@hidden/smsparser--dev--0.3
> address@hidden/smsparser--dev-wbxml--0.3
> address@hidden/smsparser--dev--0.3
> address@hidden/smsparser--dev-encadenat--0.3
> address@hidden/smsparser--dev-lib--0.3
> address@hidden/smsparser--dev-url-sync--0.3
> address@hidden/smsparser--dev-wbxml--0.3
> address@hidden/smsparser--devel--0.2
> address@hidden/smsparser--prod--0.2
> And that's what I meant.

That's not a list of logs... I agree that it's a useful function, but
the command name should reflect what it prints. :-)  I'm suggesting to
use either `tla log-versions' or `tla logs --versions' to print the
above info.

.Numeric stability is probably not all that important when you're guessing.

reply via email to

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