Re: [Monotone-devel] pretty pretty pictures (for some value of pretty)

[Johan Bolmsjö]

FYI: This command is named lsvtree in ClearCase :-) List version tree I 
guess..

http://www.agsrhichome.bnl.gov/Controls/doc/ClearCaseEnv/2003.06/ccase/doc/all/cc_ref/ct+lsvtree.htm

Personally I think it's a good idea to keep this command separate from "log". 
Ofcourse it could be triggered by a switch to log, like "--graphical" :-)

For my use I actually think that this command could be more useful then log, 
one has to think about giving the useful commands short names.

/Johan

On Thursday 14 September 2006 23:35, Rob Schoening wrote:
> Jumping back to the original idea being discussed...I would love to see
> this as part of the tool.
>
> But does it take away from driving automate to a stable state?  That
> is, would it make sense to implement this as a command-based wrapper first
> in order to help button down automate, and then fold it back in to monotone
> proper as it materializes and stabilizes?
>
> Personally, I don't tend to use external tools (TortoiseXXX, Eclipse,
> ViewXXX, Trac, whatever..).  But at the same time, I do recognize that the
> majority of developers in the world rely *exclusively* on such tools.
>
> Thus, from my perspective, adoption of monotone is held up more by
> instability to the automate interfaces (which in turn holds up development
> of external tools) than anything else other than core stability (which is
> quite good AFAICT) including user identity, versioned policy, CVS import,
> and even performance in most cases.
>
> I hope I'm not beating a dead horse here or alternatively rekindling
> discussion that ought not be rekindled....  I'm just speaking as a
> user/advocate of Monotone.
>
> RS
>
> On 9/14/06, Justin Patrin <address@hidden> wrote:
> > On 9/14/06, Nathaniel Smith <address@hidden> wrote:
> > > On Wed, Sep 13, 2006 at 10:52:38PM -0600, Derek Scherger wrote:
> > > > also, perhaps rather than "log" this output comes from a different
> > > > command like say "trace" or something.
> > >
> > > Why?  Does log have too-standardized a meaning?  Is this not what
> > > you'd want be default?  Umm... I don't know if it should be log,
> > > either, but why do you say that?
> >
> > I think it would make perfect sense to have this in log as well.
> > Better to get the DAG right out there for people to understand. :-)
> >
> > --
> > Justin Patrin
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Monotone-devel mailing list
> > address@hidden
> > http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel