[darcs-users] short options and long names (VOTE!)

[Andrew Pimlott]

On Sat, May 29, 2004 at 06:19:47AM -0400, David Roundy wrote:
> Yes, that long-awaited time has come, when we get to vote on new short
> options!

Most of these I don't have strong feelings about.

>      --force                  proceed with replace even if 'new' token already exists

-f

>      --interactive           Prompt user interactively

-i ?

>      --quiet                 suppress informational output

-q

>      --match=PATTERN           patch-matching pattern
>   -m PATCHNAME  --patch-name=PATCHNAME  name of patch

I think these need to be thought through, or maybe it's just a matter of
documentation.  I'm not even sure exactly what these do in all cases,
but I think sometimes they specify one patch (the most "recent" matching
patch) and sometimes they specify many patches; and sometimes they mean
all patches since a matching patch, sometimes all patches before a
matching patch, and sometimes the matching patch(es).  Oh, in the case
of record, it's the name of a new patch.  And are --match and
--patch-name synonyms, or does only --match provide the full pattern
syntax?  This is quite confusing, and I would beg for it to be better
understood before finalizing short options.  Perhaps the patch naming
and selection functions should be broken into more options.

I think -p should end up getting used for patch naming or selection
somehow.  -m makes no sense in record.

Andrew