Nomenclature

[Gustavo Niemeyer]

> I think Neimeyer's really asking "why does one have an underscore, but
> not the other"? 

Precisely!

> My answer: revno is terminology used outside the code. I prefer
> underscores otherwise.

Well.. there are all kinds of terminologies out there. It'd be
nice if we could get consistent inside the core by sticking to
a given one we choose.

> >> * branch.get_revision_*() vs. branch.revision_*()
> 
> The get_ operations tend to return complex objects, while non-prefixed
> ones tend to return strings, lists, etc.

Like get_rev_id() and get_parent()? :-)

> >> * branch.get_rev_id() vs. branch.revision_id_to_revno() vs. *.id2*()
> 
> I think the question here is 'should or shouldn't we abbreviate "to" as
> "2"'?

Even if we don't, get_rev_id() and revision_id_to_revno() should
be fixed to be consistent with each other, given that they're
precisely the opposite of each other.

> >> * branch.controlfilename() and branch.controlfile() vs.
> >>   branch.revision_history()
> 
> These all make sense to me.  controlfilename returns a path,
> controlfile returns a file, and revision_history produces information
> that may or may not have been obtained from a control file.

And why not control_filename() and control_file(), just like
revision_history()?

-- 
Gustavo Niemeyer
http://niemeyer.net