RFC: naming of the 'record' command in the loom plugin

Alexander Belchenko bialix at ukr.net
Tue Feb 26 06:24:05 GMT 2008


There is 'record' plugin on Plugins page (which apparently is out of date but still listed there).
This plugin is alos provide record command as in darcs.

James Westby пишет:
> Hi all,
> 
> I reported a bug on the loom plugin stating
> 
>   The name 'record' for a command is quite generic. Also it
>   is the darcs term for 'commit'.
> 
>   I also think there is an existing plugin for bzr to add darcs
>   style (per hunk) commit, which uses the 'record' name.
> 
>   Attached is a patch to change the command name to
>   'record-loom'. I didn't add any deprecation in, as with the
>   plugin only a few days in the wild I doubt anyone is too
>   used to it yet.
> 
> and Robert replied
> 
>   We don't generally qualify our other command names (we don't have
>   push-branch, or commit-tree); I'd rather we brainstorm (e.g. on the
>   bazaar list) about names than do this hacky-and-ugly name.
> 
> so I am bringing the discussion here.
> 
> My arguments for the name would be
> 
>   1. It is clear that it is to do with looms for someone just seeing
>      the command name.
>   2. It doesn't use the term from another VCS to mean something quite
>      different.
>   3. The TODO of looms makes it sound like 'record' is a lower level
>      command that will one day be superseded by a 'commit-loom' command
>      or similar. (I may have got the wrong end of the stick here).
>   4. It doesn't overlap with an existing command provided by another
>      plugin.
>   5. There are already 'revert-loom' and 'show-loom' commands, so this
>      fits in well in my opinion.
> 
> Anyone else have any opinions? Robert, do you have another suggestion
> for how we should handle this?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> James
> 
> 
> 
> 




More information about the bazaar mailing list