=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Ramon_Rib=F3?= <ram...@compassis.com> wrote: > > If there is an option that a user has no interest in using, why would > > the user attempt to remember what it was? > > I recently had to read the cvs manual to find an option of one > subcommand. I assure you that it was not a pleasant task to surf > between the thousands of stupid options that cvs has gained with the > years. >
Hm, I just browsed the man pages of many VCS systems (CVS included) to find examples of parameters for the message file. I had no problem locating their pages, browsing the manual and finding them for 6 VCS systems in about 3 minutes. > > I personally like -M / --message-file and would value any features that > > make fossil easier to integrate > > I have recently integrated fossil inside a GUI tool in RamDebugger (is > it the first integration?), and have not missed at all the > "-message-file" option. Why? It is fairly easy from an external tool > to massage the log message to fit in the "-m" option. > Some tools it would not be a problem, you are right. Currently I am trying to integrate with one tool and it provides a simple macro recorder, nothing really more. So, what you can type with your keyboard, it will record. I suppose I could figure out some crazy regexp to do what I want, or we could do like every other VCS under the sun and provide a -M/--message-file option. I *really* fail to see why an option like this should even be debated or why one would deny a helpful feature to make our job easier just because there are already 6 options, that as said, are very easy to get help on. Jeremy _______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
