inconsistent commands and options ... a problem?

[solo turn]

i d appreciate if every commands gives an output, so you do not have
to run a second one to find out what happened.

standard seems to be "--quiet" for no output. not in mercurial though.

-solo


On 6/6/07, Emanuele Aina <faina.mail at tiscali.it> wrote:
> solo turn osservò:
>
> > the hg purge ad --print made me look up some information on commands
> > and options, the result:
> >
> > the inconsistency in its command set is the main reason i really could
> > dislike mercurial if it was not so powerful.
> >
> > there is --dry-run (rename) , --print (purge), hg incoming (as pulls
> > --print), outgoing (as pushs --print)just to name a few.
>
> Leaving incoming and outgoing as they are, I can rename --print in
> --dry-run, but then it gives me some problems:
>
> * how can I rename --print0? Unfortunately the --print0 in purge has
>    also the additional problem of being different to the one in status,
>    as in purge it implies --print/--dry-run. This is due to the fact that
>    the default action in purge is to not print anything.
>    Any suggestions about reorganizing all of them?
>
> * --dry-run only says to do nothing, which is not very useful with the
>    purge default of doing nothing. Should I make it also print
>    automatically? Or you should need to use both --dry-run and --verbose
>    to get an output?
>
> > then there is
> > the revisions which are stated always differently, like in bundle,
> > merge, backout and diff, then there is -r in status.
>
> Apart of adding --revision everywhere, in status we already have
> --deleted, so we need to think to something else to replace --removed.
>
> > then there is the
> > -a which is different in diff, in revert, in status. then there is hg
>
> The one in diff is due to the traditional diff command and we can't
> change it. I think that the inconsistency in status and revert is not
> worth the trouble of replacing these very useful short options, as they
> are very different commands.
>
> > sigs, hg view and hg log for listing change sets,
>
> This doesn't seems an inconsistency to me: one is a traditional textual
> log while the other is an advanced graphical interface. While looking
> forward for the integration of the "glog" extension in the main "log"
> command as an option, I don't see a reasonable way of merging log and view.
>
> --
> Buongiorno.
> Complimenti per l'ottima scelta.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mercurial mailing list
> Mercurial at selenic.com
> http://selenic.com/mailman/listinfo/mercurial
>