[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       darcs-users
Subject:    Re: [darcs-users] recap of put options
From:       zander () kde ! org
Date:       2005-02-21 22:31:44
Message-ID: 20050221223144.GA24343 () factotummedia ! nl
[Download RAW message or body]


On Mon, Feb 21, 2005 at 11:16:00PM +0100, Tommy Pettersson wrote:
> I like 'clone'.  999/1000 I do 'darcs get . _fix_feature',
> 'darcs get foo _tmp' or 'darcs get . /var/repos/foo'.
> It would look nicest with 'clone', and not 'get' or 'put'.
> But that's my mere personal preference.
> 
> It's been argued that 'get' is kinder to new users since they
> can recognize it as 'cvs checkout'.  I will boldly suggest
> that it also can deceive them to think of their repo as a
> cvs checkout, and make it harder for them to comprehend what
> 'record', 'pull' and 'push/send' does.

You make that sound like a bad thing.
Its not a bad thing to be able to look at a certain command set being very
much similar to what you are used to already.  Learning that more is
possible can always be moved to the future.

I told my colleagues that record is the same as 'commit' except that it
allows you to do it in 2 steps so you gain the advantage to:
a) do a commit (aka record) offline
b) do a couple of commits before you push.

That is low complexity and basically means they will keep using darcs as
they did cvs using these advantages.

In the end I will disagree that this way of thinking makes it harder to
comprehend what record/pull/push/send do.  See, I used the fact that users
like to reuse the things they already know, (avoid fear of relearning) and
I added some features on top of that.

-- 
Thomas Zander

[Attachment #3 (application/pgp-signature)]

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]