[darcs-users] Naming consistency between darcs and other DVCSs

Eric Kow kowey at darcs.net
Wed Jul 15 09:01:11 UTC 2009

On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 08:34:23 +0100, Ashley Moran wrote:
> I just re-stumbled across the darcs Rosetta Stone[1].  What I hadn't  
> noticed before was the section "Recommendations for unification":
> 	• rename get to clone
> 	• rename changes to log
> 	• rename record to commit (DVCS are popular enough now)
> 	• rename rollback to new "repeal"
> These changes sound sensible to me.  (Plus `darcs uncommit`?)  Is there 
> an active effort to make darcs more consistent with other DVCSes?  

This was mostly just idle scratch pad thinking on my part, which is why
I never bothered to announce this on the mailing list.  Something for
the long long term.

I would like to see a future where people can seamlessly move from one
version control system to another without having to deal with commands
meaning subtly different things in one and the other.  But if we want
to do this, we have to be very careful that we aren't just creating
more of these sorts of traps.  So this needs people who understand a pair of
revision control systems inside and out.

Eric Kow <http://www.nltg.brighton.ac.uk/home/Eric.Kow>
PGP Key ID: 08AC04F9
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 194 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.osuosl.org/pipermail/darcs-users/attachments/20090715/48dbd38e/attachment.pgp>

More information about the darcs-users mailing list