Re: baz and tla
"Benj. Mako Hill" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Without going down a semantic rathole, I'm happy to disagree here. In > any case, it was meant more of a good-natured (if slightly vicious) > jab against a program I love and am very critical of. I apologize if > it came out wrong. Er, no problem. I admit I pretty much ignore emoticons these days, as many people seem to have the idea that "If I add a smiley, I can say whatever I want!" -Miles -- Occam's razor split hairs so well, I bought the whole argument! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: baz and tla
> "Benj. Mako Hill" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> IMHO, it's a bug if it doesn't work efficiently without specialized > >> assistance from shell completions. > > > > Absolutely. The fact that such a workaround is essential is a sign of > > serious problem. :) tla has those in force. :) > > Geez can you be a bit more trollish? It was meant to be good natured -- hence the emoticons. > Personally I value the actual functionality more than the CLI because I > can easily (trivially) work around the latter, but not the former. So do I. That's why I use tla and baz and advocate it others. I've moved all of my archives to tla or baz and have trouble using anything else. > In other words, it's not a "serious problem." Without going down a semantic rathole, I'm happy to disagree here. In any case, it was meant more of a good-natured (if slightly vicious) jab against a program I love and am very critical of. I apologize if it came out wrong. Regards, Mako -- Benjamin Mako Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mako.cc/ signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: baz and tla
"Benj. Mako Hill" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> IMHO, it's a bug if it doesn't work efficiently without specialized >> assistance from shell completions. > > Absolutely. The fact that such a workaround is essential is a sign of > serious problem. :) tla has those in force. :) Geez can you be a bit more trollish? Personally I value the actual functionality more than the CLI because I can easily (trivially) work around the latter, but not the former. In other words, it's not a "serious problem." [And in fact I think tla's CLI is not particularly bad; the main problem seems to be that it's _different_, and people tend to be conservative.] -Miles -- It wasn't the Exxon Valdez captain's driving that caused the Alaskan oil spill. It was yours. [Greenpeace advertisement, New York Times, 25 February 1990] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: baz and tla
On Tue, 7 Jun 2005, Benj. Mako Hill wrote: > > > On Tue, Jun 07, 2005 at 10:40:47AM -0400, Benj. Mako Hill wrote: > > > > > > > That sounds very nice indeed. If that pans out, and you also fix the UI > > > > issues (by which I mean I have to type approximately three times as many > > > > characters to accomplish the same thing that I do in darcs), that would > > > > be very nice. > > > > > > It blows my mind that people actually use tla or baz without very good > > > shell completions. The lack of shell completions kept me from > > > switching to baz for weeks. ;) > > > > IMHO, it's a bug if it doesn't work efficiently without specialized > > assistance from shell completions. > > Absolutely. The fact that such a workaround is essential is a sign of > serious problem. :) tla has those in force. :) > > > For my own part, I've found the tla completion support to generally be > > buggy and not all that helpful. > > The zsh completions for tla has treated me quite well. Bazaar is > moving fast enough that it breaks pretty frequently. I had a perl script that parsed tla --help output to produce bash completions. Was rather complete on the completions it supported(per-command options/values, etc). -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
