[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: annotate vs blame

From: Garrett Rooney <rooneg_at_electricjellyfish.net>
Date: 2002-08-29 21:23:58 CEST

Noel Yap wrote:

> Like I said before, IMHO, blame is counter-productive
> due to its negative connotations.
> Does anyone else feel either way about the name for
> this functionality?

i think 'svn blame' is a lot more descriptive than 'svn annotate', i
think it's more appropriate considering the most common use case for the
command (like cmike, i often use it to see who wrote the buggy code i'm
correcting so i can yell at them), and i think it's a hell of a lot more

and if we're going to bend over backwards to make our command line
client's commands not have a 'negative connotation', i think it's kind
of depressing... it smacks of being 'pollitically correct' for no good
reason. i mean we called the program 'subversion' for crying out loud,
that sure as hell has a pseudo-negative connotation itself...


To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Thu Aug 29 21:29:19 2002

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.