[darcs-users] Using wrong message when rerecording

[Taral]

On Mon, Oct 18, 2004 at 05:38:42PM +0200, Jean Jordaan wrote:
> Perhaps it's possible to disentangle the un/re/record terminology.
> I find that and un/pull very nu-speaky.

Actually, un/pull is quite reasonable, as is un/record. But "rerecord"
implies that it undoes an unrecord. Perhaps "extend" or "update" or
something else would work instead for that command name? "rerecord" is
plainly too confusing.

-- 
Taral <taral at taral.net>
This message is digitally signed. Please PGP encrypt mail to me.
A: Because it fouls the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.osuosl.org/pipermail/darcs-users/attachments/20041018/8456b052/attachment.pgp