[darcs-users] Naming consistency between darcs and other DVCSs
ashley.moran at patchspace.co.uk
Wed Jul 15 18:24:04 UTC 2009
On 15 Jul 2009, at 11:58, Dan Pascu wrote:
> I find commit and log worse names than record and changes. I also
> consider them to be remnants of the old ages. Everybody copied them
> over from CVS, so they become widespread, however that doesn't make
> them necessarily better.
Actually I've always found `darcs changes` confusing. I'd expect it
to do what is actually handled by `darcs whatsnew`. I've always felt
`darcs changes` should be something more like `darcs show patches` or
some such. Never put a lot of thought into it, it's just my head
doesn't accept these terms easily.
`darcs record`, however, I've always preferred to "commit".
And I like `darcs get` because its opposite is also its antonym -
`darcs get`. Because of the reversible nature of most darcs commands,
I like the ones that form pairs to be named in a way that implies
More information about the darcs-users