[darcs-users] Re: argh. please change the name "unpull"

[Michael Conrad]

On Thursday, March 17, 2005 6:02 PM, Jamie Webb wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 17, 2005 at 10:17:06PM +0000, Mark Stosberg wrote:
> > In all cases the patch is applied with 'apply' at some point, which is
> > why  I think I'm leaving my vote on 'unapply'.
>
> AOL, I think, as an improvement on unpull, but I do wonder if
> something more dramatic and scary sounding might be an idea, since you
> can lose data. Destroy; eradicate; annihilate... sounds corny, but
> quite unequivocal.
>
> That, or maybe as I think someone else suggested a while back,
> unpulled patches should be put 'on ice' somewhere. Not in a repository
> where you have to worry about conflicts, just somewhere from which
> they can be resurrected if necessary. And somewhere from which a user
> can once and for all delete them manually if absolutely sure.

Personally, I'd prefer "drop" or "toss" ;-)  They are only 4 letters long,
and fit the theme of pulling and pushing.  They also would be semi-easy to
pick off a list of commands, assuming the user is familiar with English.
Actually, a non-English speaker might recognize "drop" from SQL.  Also, they
imply that the patch will both be unapplied and removed from the inventory,
and they don't have any logical alternate meaning.  (actually, "drop" could
mean to delete an archive entirely, but it would be silly to have a command
to do it, especially since it would kill the working directory)

Hehe, how about "punt"?

"Wipe" might also work.

And, the more I think about it, Punt is my new preference ;-)

On a sidenote, if I were going to choose the actions and verbs for a
revision control program I would probably use "rollback" to put a patch 'on
ice', "restore" to bring it back, "dispose" to remove it from the holding
space, and not have a verb to both rollback and dispose.

-Mike