> 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.
-Fitz
Received on Sat Oct 21 14:36:11 2006