[PATCH] hgwatchman: new experimental extension

[Siddharth Agarwal]

On 2/23/16 13:57, Augie Fackler wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 03:48:31PM +0100, Martijn Pieters wrote:
>> So, personally I think we should stick with hgwatchman to prevent
>> getting confused over what part of the whole is being addressed.
> I'm convinced the hg should stay. Anyone else have strong feelings either way?

As the person who actually named the extension in the first place, I 
think the 'hg' should stay as well. Just the name 'watchman' is really 
ambiguous -- as Martin said, does it refer to the watchman service 
itself or to the integration layer?

As far as the argument to convention goes, I strongly believe 
conventions should be overridden by common sense if necessary.

> _______________________________________________
> Mercurial-devel mailing list
> Mercurial-devel at mercurial-scm.org
> https://www.mercurial-scm.org/mailman/listinfo/mercurial-devel