Hook ordering - behaviour change.
Matt Mackall
mpm at selenic.com
Wed Aug 4 12:40:33 CDT 2010
On Wed, 2010-08-04 at 10:25 -0700, Aravind Gottipati wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 12:00 AM, Dirkjan Ochtman <dirkjan at ochtman.nl> wrote:
> > Hmm, I think I'd still prefer it to be called just "sort", "sorthooks"
> > feels verbose in the context of a "hooks" section. Also, maybe we
> > should have it take a value instead of boolean, to disambiguate?
> > Sorting by order of appearance in the hgrc file is still sorting, in a
> > sense. sort = name seems clearer (or sortby?).
>
> I sort of disagree. The default is not to sort it but take it at face
> value in the order they are listed. Also, we don't really have
> multiple sort options (sort by alpha, sort by value instead of key, or
> other random options), its either alpha-numeric or no sort, which is
> why a boolean made sense to me. But I will leave to you guys. I am
> not too attached to the name. Having a simple "sort = True", is fine
> by me.
>
> > Would you be in a position to add a test for it as well? The test
> > format is pretty simple (see the tests dir, just add to a test-* file
> > that deals with hooks) and it will ensure we don't regress this.
>
> I looked at the format and it looks simple enough. I can add the
> tests and re-submit the patches once we decide on what we want to call
> the option :)
I like 'sort'.
--
Mathematics is the supreme nostalgia of our time.
More information about the Mercurial-devel
mailing list