Greg Hudson <ghudson@MIT.EDU> writes:
> In r10430, brane committed a change to implement "svn version" as a
> subcommand.
>
> As far as I know, this idea came up in some smoky back room and was
> implemented without much discussion. I am close to -1 on it because:
Its discussion was spread out over a long time, and was never very
involved. Not a smoky back room, but not exactly broadcast over a
megaphone either. It's related to issue #1959 (show server version
when given URl), an issue which kind-of-sort-of implies -- but doesn't
come right out and say -- there should be an 'svn version' command.
> * I think we need to keep our subcommand count small. If a user
> wants to figure out how to do something, the list of subcommands
> is one of the primary places to look. The longer this list, the
> longer it will take users to find what they want.
>
> * Subcommands are typically seen as verbs, not as nouns. So people
> might get derailed thinking that there is an svn subcommand to
> "version" a file or directory.
I'm +0 on it. I don't think it will confuse people very much; on the
other hand, if there were a way to add the show-server-version feature
without making this a subcommand, I'd be fine with that too.
-Karl, taking a cue from the current US Democratic National Convention
by straddling both sides.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Wed Jul 28 20:16:38 2004