[Re-posting with meaningful subject line.]
The root of the problem pointed out here is that
'svn merge --merge-sensitive' looks odd.
On Tue, 29 May 2007, David James wrote:
> On 5/29/07, Daniel Rall <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> >On Thu, 24 May 2007, Karl Fogel wrote:
> >> "David James" <email@example.com> writes:
> >> > I know this is a bikeshed, but, how about "--merge-smart"? This flag
> >> > makes the merge command smarter -- it teaches the merge command to
> >> > look at your merge history and figure out what revisions to merge.
> >> > Without this flag, the merge command acts dumb and doesn't guess.
> >> >
> >> > This flag name could work for "svn info" and "svn log" as well.
> >> Then just "--smart", maybe?
> >> http://pink.bikeshed.com/
> >"smart" doesn't give a nod to the fact that we're adhering to merge
> How about "--track-merge-history" or "--smart-merge-tracking" then?
> These names are longer than "--merge-smart" and "--smart" but might
> indicate the purpose of the flag a bit better.
"--track-merge-history" is a perfect description for the use cases
we're currently targeting, implemented via the following subcommands:
It's only 4 characters longer than "--merge-sensitive", and we have a
short option ("-g"). Would anyone be adverse to switching, or does
anyone have a better suggestion?
Received on Thu May 31 22:31:55 2007
- application/pgp-signature attachment: stored