[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [Gnu-arch-users] New aba command: revert, name clash with tlash

From: Aaron Bentley
Subject: Re: [Gnu-arch-users] New aba command: revert, name clash with tlash
Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2004 15:19:33 -0500
User-agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.5 (X11/20040309)

David Allouche wrote:
On Fri, Mar 26, 2004 at 12:54:42PM -0500, Aaron Bentley wrote:

David Allouche wrote:

"revert" is already the name of a tlash alias for "tla replay --reverse"
which is IMHO very handy and natural.

Hmm...  extract?  reject?

It would make sense to rename the log-preserving undo "reject".

The scenario would be:

  1. star-merge with contributor's branch
  2. reject unwanted patches

Actually, for "reject", I'd rather have a log-preserving replay --reverse, as in

$ aba star-merge ^foo
$ aba reject ^foo--patch-3
$ aba reject ^foo--patch-5
$ aba commit -s "merge from foo (dropped patch-3, patch-5)"

"Revert", the verb for "reverse", seems better suited to "replay

While "revert" and "reverse" are cognates, the verb form of "reverse" is actually "reverse". "Revert" means "return to an earlier state", as in "revert to saved version". Since "replay --reverse" can retain some changes while removing others, I think "reverse" would be a better name for the "replay --reverse" alias.

The ability to use and view only the patchlog or non-patchlog part of
changesets is a generally useful feature which I believe is okay with
Tom to put in tla.

It makes sense to me too. We can hack around it for specific cases, but it seems tough to generalize. I'd also prefer to ignore changes to ++default-version.


Aaron Bentley
Director of Technology
Panometrics, Inc.

reply via email to

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