[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Monotone-devel] Why?
From: |
Derek Scherger |
Subject: |
Re: [Monotone-devel] Why? |
Date: |
Mon, 30 May 2005 21:17:47 -0600 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (X11/20050403) |
Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker wrote:
> I've a couple of gripes that I need to share:
>
> 1. 'monotone update' still takes an optional argument. Is there any
> reason why it doesn't use --revision like all the others? If noone
> minds a change to using --revision, I've a change ready to be
> commited.
No reason, other than --revision wasn't around at the time that was
added probably. There are probably a few other commands that should be
using options rather than arguments as well. At a glance:
- genkey/dropkey/chkeypass/pubkey/privkey should probably use --key
and we've got to be able to improve on the name of chkeypass ;)
- cert/trusted/tag/testresult/approve/disapprove should use --revision
- comment should probably use both --revision and --message
- fcommit should use --revision (or be removed entirely)
- not sure what to do with cat but it appears to need help
- cdiff could be replaced with an option to diff (--context and
--unified perhaps)
> 2. Why on earth does everyone insist on putting all those random
> [--revision=REVISION] and other options in the arguments help for
> the command when those options are already explained above the
> command help? The commands currently having that kind of extra
Guilty as charged :)
With command specific options and associated help I agree that these are
redundant.
Cheers,
Derek