more consistent "-r means [REV]"

[Matt Mackall]

On Fri, Apr 20, 2007 at 11:58:17AM -0400, Daniel Holth wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> Matt Mackall wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 19, 2007 at 05:15:31PM -0400, Daniel Holth wrote:
> >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> >> Hash: SHA1
> >>
> >> Rather than try to remember which commands use -r and which don't, a
> >> mistake I constantly make (made) and I've seen others make, here is a
> >> patch to accept -r in more places.
> >>
> >> I had to change "hg status" to accept "-e" as "show removed files". I
> >> think this is worthwhile for consistency, and because "revision" is a
> >> much more frequently needed concept than "removed (erased)"
> >>
> >> Comments?
> >
> > Thanks for doing this.
> >
> > I'm slightly bothered by changing status. We've had -r there for a
> > long time and the -r there matches the R reported for removed files.
> > We need to think about this piece a bit more.
> >
> > The rest of it looks good though.
> OK, here's the split-out version. I probably missed a few commands
> that could take -r, but I got the ones that I use most often. I'm
> thinking I can work on it a bit more and make status -r determine
> whether you mean "revision" by context, which would work unless you
> had files with the same name as tags or mercurial options.

That sounds like a recipe for confusion.

-- 
Mathematics is the supreme nostalgia of our time.