[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Gnu-arch-users] Re: GNU Arch review - am I accurate?
From: |
Stefan Monnier |
Subject: |
[Gnu-arch-users] Re: GNU Arch review - am I accurate? |
Date: |
11 Mar 2004 18:10:48 -0500 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.3.50 |
> - Prefix for the log file: Since tla make-log returns full path,
> any-editor $(tla make-log)
> works correctly. Actualy, I always do "vi +ArchLog" anyway.
Given that a log file is completely unnecessary (you can use the
"CVS-style" of passing a log without ever noticing that you could use
`make-log').
> - Name for the arch directory. {arch} has a nice feature of sorting
> after anything else (only |, } and ~ sort after {).
Sorting after everything else means that it prints right next to the
prompt, i.e. it prints where I'm looking which is rather silly since
I don't want to see it, usually.
Given all the discussions on the cvs-info list way back when it's hard to
believe that someone might come around and choose {arch} rather than say
.arch [ But then again, someone else chose MCVS even though he obviously
can't claim he knows nothing about CVS. ]
> Since one seldom needs to work with files there manualy, I can live with
> typing extra \ time to time (in addition, in bash {<Tab> completes
> correctly to \{arch\})
But if it was .arch, it would be automatically ignored by *, completion,
ls, ... i.e. it would *just work*.
> (or better, make tla use ~/.arch-params/=tagging-method if it exists).
That would be helpful, indeed.
Stefan
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] GNU Arch review - am I accurate?, (continued)
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] GNU Arch review - am I accurate?, David MENTRE, 2004/03/10
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] GNU Arch review - am I accurate?, David A. Wheeler, 2004/03/07
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] GNU Arch review - am I accurate?, David A. Wheeler, 2004/03/09
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: GNU Arch review - am I accurate?, Miles Bader, 2004/03/11
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] GNU Arch review - am I accurate?, Jan Hudec, 2004/03/11
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: GNU Arch review - am I accurate?,
Stefan Monnier <=
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: GNU Arch review - am I accurate?, Miles Bader, 2004/03/13
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: GNU Arch review - am I accurate?, Jan Hudec, 2004/03/13
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: GNU Arch review - am I accurate?, Miles Bader, 2004/03/12
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: GNU Arch review - am I accurate?, Jani Monoses, 2004/03/13
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: GNU Arch review - am I accurate?, Tom Lord, 2004/03/13
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: GNU Arch review - am I accurate?, Aaron Bentley, 2004/03/13
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: GNU Arch review - am I accurate?, David Brown, 2004/03/13
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] GNU Arch review - am I accurate?, David A. Wheeler, 2004/03/10