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

[Aaron Bentley]

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
> --reverse".

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

--
Aaron Bentley
Director of Technology
Panometrics, Inc.