On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 08:34:23 +0100, Ashley Moran wrote: > I just re-stumbled across the darcs Rosetta Stone[1]. What I hadn't > noticed before was the section "Recommendations for unification": > > • rename get to clone > • rename changes to log > • rename record to commit (DVCS are popular enough now) > • rename rollback to new "repeal" > > These changes sound sensible to me. (Plus `darcs uncommit`?) Is there > an active effort to make darcs more consistent with other DVCSes?
This was mostly just idle scratch pad thinking on my part, which is why I never bothered to announce this on the mailing list. Something for the long long term. I would like to see a future where people can seamlessly move from one version control system to another without having to deal with commands meaning subtly different things in one and the other. But if we want to do this, we have to be very careful that we aren't just creating more of these sorts of traps. So this needs people who understand a pair of revision control systems inside and out. -- Eric Kow <http://www.nltg.brighton.ac.uk/home/Eric.Kow> PGP Key ID: 08AC04F9
pgp3fpTJ1hrow.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
