On Tue, 27 Mar 2007, Blair Zajac wrote:
>
> On Mar 27, 2007, at 8:44 AM, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
>
> >Blair Zajac wrote:
> >>C. Michael Pilato wrote:
> >>>Karl Fogel wrote:
> >>>If folks are cool with introducing svn-mucc, I'm volunteering for
> >>>the
> >>>task.
> >>>
> >>
> >><painting bikeshed>
> >>
> >>Looking at all the other names of svn tools, svnsync, svnadmin,
> >>svnlook,
> >> maybe we should name this svnmucc without the hyphen. On the other
> >>hand, people who don't know svn will wonder, what is that program
> >>since
> >>mucc isn't a word like the other suffixes to svn :)
> >>
> >></painting bikeshed>
> >
> >There seems to be a pretty big push for just making 'svn shell' and
> >rolling
> >the mucc functionality into it. I don't think I have the time to do
> >the kind
> >of planning I would want done before releasing something like that.
> >
> >On the other hand, if we put out svnmucc, we have to support it
> >even if 'svn
> >shell' gets created. Now, maybe that means that someday it becomes
> >a thin
> >wrapper around 'svn shell' or something -- I don't know. But I
> >don't want
> >your or my interest in make this tool a little more high-profile to
> >conflict
> >with everyone's interest in keeping maintenance burdens and user
> >confusion
> >levels to a minimum.
>
> Sure, I don't mind. Mucc is already functional, I just wanted it to
> get more visibility since it is a useful tool.
How about improving its documentation and linkage in our web site's
files? And/or adding a blurb about it to the next version of the
Subversion book?
- application/pgp-signature attachment: stored
Received on Tue Mar 27 18:37:19 2007