> On Tue, Oct 17, 2000 at 11:39:20AM -0500, B. W. Fitzpatrick wrote:
> > > -d is a historical leftover even in CVS, from the days when the
> > > repository was always a directory on the same machine as the working
> > > copy.
> > >
> > > I don't think we should try to preserve CVS's hysterical raisins --
> > > that's needlessly perpetuating confusion
> > That should, IMO, be the charter of the command line client
> > group. Many of the letters for CVS's command line options make
> > absolutely no sense. Let's hear it for `Feature Compatible' with CVS,
> > not `Just as buggy and weird as' CVS.
> Sure -- Karl's statement that -d does in fact cause confusion is absolutely
> sufficient reason to change it. Until this moment I had no idea that there
> were people who had trouble simply memorizing this stuff. This is probably
> a positive proof that you shouldn't put me in charge of user-friendliness (as
> though one were needed).
I think that for most people it's a matter of mnemonics. Mapping `-d'
to `repository info' is just not obvious.
> Hey Fitz, I don't need to be scared of Lefty, do I? :-)
As long as he is here and you are there, no. But once he gets his car
at the end of the month, all bets are off.
Received on Sat Oct 21 14:36:11 2006