Julian Foad wrote:
> I would very much encourage you to take an issue such as this one, if
> it's a development that we want. And I see that this one looks like a
> good one to choose for an easy task.
> However, as I expect you are aware, an issue being in the issue tracker
> just means that someone, anyone, put it there; it doesn't mean there is
> any kind of consensus on it.
Yes, which is why I made the post just in case any veteran devs
have issues (pardon the pun) with doing anything. I have 'hacked'
up a patch, but since I'm still learning the ropes here, I figured
it would be a good idea to hold it off and make sure no one
objects to having a short cut for --ignore-externals.
> We have always been very cautious of using up single-letter options,
> because there are not enough of them available for all the meanings we
> want. There are several options that we might want to abbreviate to '-i'
> or '-I':
> and we might well add more in 1.7, 1.8, 1.9.
True, and I definitely understand the hesitation with assigning a
> It could well be that --ignore-externals is the most commonly used by
> far, in which case we might want to add a short alias for it. But before
> we jump to any conclusions, we should also ask (the original poster, and
> ourselves) whether the problem would be better solved in a different
> way, perhaps by making "ignore-externals" a configurable option in
> ~/subversion/config and having an inverse option (--with-externals ?)
> available to override it if it only rarely needs to be overridden.
> Looking at the list of options we have, it seems to me that it would
> make sense for many of them to have a customisable default in the config
> file, and both positive and negative forms available on the command
> We also have a precedent of abbreviating a long option to a shorter
> "long" option: --changelist is also --cl. Maybe there's a good "long"
> abbreviation for --ignore-externals.
That's another good option. i.e. -ie? Sure it is less than the
current length, but it also complicates matters since short cuts
(as far as I know) are one letter. Introducing a 2-letter string
into the mix might break the option structure. (I think it does
> Questions like this are one reason why an issue should have been
> discussed on the mailing list before it was filed.
> Do you have any involvement or perspective on this particular issue
I don't have much of any involvement in this issue since I don't
use --ignore-externals. I guess my enthusiasm for doing 'easy'
fixes overcame my wisdom in choosing the right issues. Reading
your comments and Blair's, I think the Issue-poster should
really have discussed it here. But I guess this is the same
thing, it's just that I was the one who started it and not
Received on 2009-07-14 03:07:47 CEST