[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: Noel Yap <yap_noel_at_yahoo.com>
Date: 2002-08-29 22:37:12 CEST

--- Dave Cridland <dave@cridland.net> wrote:
> On Thu, 2002-08-29 at 18:17, Greg Hudson wrote:
> > * It's more descriptive. ("annotate" is
> counter-intuitive, really; it
> > sounds like a command to attach a note to a
> revision, or something.)
> Indeed, that's what I thought it was. The use of
> "svn blame" didn't help
> me in that misconception, since I assumed you were
> simply annotating to
> attach blame.

This is a good point.

> I'd have called it "trace", really, but that's
> probably (as usual) just
> me.

At least "trace" is more neutral.

Aside from CVS transitioning issues (which is being
addressed by the alias), the biggest problem I have
with "blame" is its negativity (which, I suppose, is
at least partially addressed by the alias).
Seriously, what other standard tools have non-neutral,
"emotional-connotative" commands like "blame"?


Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Finance - Get real-time stock quotes

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Thu Aug 29 23:29:33 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.