On Mon, 2010-10-25 at 15:54 +0200, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 10:21:27AM -0000, julianfoad_at_apache.org wrote:
> > Author: julianfoad
> > Date: Mon Oct 25 10:21:27 2010
> > New Revision: 1027029
> > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1027029&view=rev
> > Log:
> > * subversion/svn/main.c
> > (svn_cl__options): Remove the alias '--nul' (for --no-unlock/--keep-lock),
> > in order to have at most one alias per option, and because I didn't
> > like its name.
> For options which are being typed often during interactive use,
> I like having aliases that are at most 2 or 3 characters.
> The --no-unlock option is a bit special because it's also a double-negative
> which isn't intuitive. Note how the API uses "keep_lock", so the CLI client
> always passes "!no_unlock" to the API. IMO the option should always have
> been called --keep-lock.
> So in this case, I'd like to have both a short form for typing,
> and a --keep-lock alias.
BTW I think "keep-locks" would be more accurate than the current
"keep-lock", because the number of locks to keep is zero or more.
> But I agree that "nul" isn't a good name. Maybe we should provide a
> short alias that sounds more like --keep-lock? Unfortunately --kl is
> already taken by --keep-local, which sounds very similar to --keep-lock.
> We should try to create short forms for both these options in a way that
> makes it easy to tell which is which.
> Maybe like this?
> --keep-local => --kal
> --keep-lock => --kck
Received on 2010-10-25 18:34:23 CEST