Ganesh Sittampalam wrote: > On Thu, 12 Nov 2009, Trent W. Buck wrote: > > >Florent Becker <[email protected]> writes: > > > >>The object of these patches is to add a --dont-frobnicate option for each > >>--frobnicate option. That way, you can put "command frobnicate" in your > >>prefs file, and still use --dont-frobnicate when you need the default > >>behaviour. > > > >I'm glad argument consistency is getting some attention[...] > > They look ok to me as a short-term improvement that may well be > obsoleted by a proper reorganisation of the command-line flags.
I agree with that analysis. > Trent, are you happy for these patches to be applied? The only > possible reservation I have is that they introduce yet more > inconsistent language into the way that command-line arguments are > negated, and might create more of a legacy to support in future. > Does anyone else have any opinions on that? My only reservations are those you outline above. The support burden is particularly significant if this goes into the 2.4 release, but the larger option overhaul (discussed in other threads) doesn't. _______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
