On Mon, 2010-10-25 at 15:54 +0200, Stefan Sperling wrote: > On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 10:21:27AM -0000, julianf...@apache.org wrote: > > Author: julianfoad > > Date: Mon Oct 25 10:21:27 2010 > > New Revision: 1027029 > > > > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1027029&view=rev > > Log: > > * subversion/svn/main.c > > (svn_cl__options): Remove the alias '--nul' (for --no-unlock/--keep-lock), > > in order to have at most one alias per option, and because I didn't > > like its name. > > For options which are being typed often during interactive use, > I like having aliases that are at most 2 or 3 characters. > > The --no-unlock option is a bit special because it's also a double-negative > which isn't intuitive. Note how the API uses "keep_lock", so the CLI client > always passes "!no_unlock" to the API. IMO the option should always have > been called --keep-lock. > > So in this case, I'd like to have both a short form for typing, > and a --keep-lock alias.
BTW I think "keep-locks" would be more accurate than the current "keep-lock", because the number of locks to keep is zero or more. > But I agree that "nul" isn't a good name. Maybe we should provide a > short alias that sounds more like --keep-lock? Unfortunately --kl is > already taken by --keep-local, which sounds very similar to --keep-lock. > We should try to create short forms for both these options in a way that > makes it easy to tell which is which. > > Maybe like this? > > --keep-local => --kal > --keep-lock => --kck Mumble. --julian
