Stephan Beal <sgb...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > i'm with Jeremy on this one: -M/--message-file. That said, Richard's been > interestingly quiet throughout this conversation, which leads me to suspect > that he's hacking away at some clever alternative which will make all this > moot :). >
SVN uses -F and --file BZR uses -F and --file HG uses -l and --logfile CVS uses -F Git uses -F Monotone uses --message-file Darcs uses --logfile ... now, one side note... all these tools support the loading of a commit log message via a file. I did not look at the other 100 tools, only the ones that I have used in the past for any length of time. We already have on the commit command: --comment|-m COMMENT-TEXT --branch NEW-BRANCH-NAME --bgcolor COLOR --nosign --force|-f --private So, if we were to use -F, we'd be overloading --force. That's probably not a good idea as it will not err out, I wouldn't think, on a "CAPS" lock error (has anyone ever done that or are we programming around a 1 in a million case? i.e. -m vs. -M. HG using --logfile|-l seems OK, but I think I like --message-file|-M better still. One thing to think about is we don't *have* to have a short option. My guess is that we will not be using --message-file from the command line that often. It's probably going to be used mainly from other tools, but that's just a guess, no real data backing that thought other than my own usage. Jeremy _______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
