[PATCH 2 of 3] patchbomb: customize promptchoice to allow localization of choices
Christian Ebert
blacktrash at gmx.net
Mon Aug 30 08:37:50 CDT 2010
* Mads Kiilerich on Monday, August 30, 2010 at 14:39:55 +0200
> On 08/28/2010 11:44 AM, Christian Ebert wrote:
>> * Christian Ebert on Saturday, August 28, 2010 at 01:03:42 +0100
>>> * Mads Kiilerich on Saturday, August 28, 2010 at 00:01:37 +0200
>>>> --diffstat apparently does something quite similar to what you
>>>> introduce with --confirm.
>>>
>>> It asks for confirmation of the diffstat of each patch. 3 patches
>>> -> 3 prompts. confirm: 3 patches: 1 prompt. And, well, diffstat
>>> shows the diffstat, and confirm shows the message details,
>>> sender, recipients, subjects.
>>>
>>>> What is your thoughts regarding that? Are both of them needed and do
>>>> they supplement each other? Could --diffstat be expanded instead of
>>>> introducing a new option - or should --diffstat be deprecated?
>>>
>>> Frankly, I don't understand you there. Sorry.
>>
>> In my eyes there's a fundamental difference between diffstat and
>> confirm, as diffstat changes the messages themselves. That's why
>> the 2 options only overlap by presenting a boolean prompt (and
>> diffstat does this for each patch as well for the whole series)
>> and not in their, errmh, content ... But I probably still don't
>> understand your question.
>
> I doubt there is an answer, so it probably wasn't a question at all ...
>
> I just wanted to raise some attention to the fact that we now are
> introducing a second completely different option for patchbomb
> confirmation.
I know, I think patchbomb is quite cluttered with, errmh,
features already, which is why in February I introduced --confirm
via the backdoor by simply abusing --verbose. After all a
confirmation is verbose ;-) But I agree that this would be very
unclean and "surprising".
> It is unfortunate that --diffstat does two completely different
> things. Couldn't that be considered a ui bug that should be fixed?
> ;-)
I'm not using diffstat, but the diffstat confirmation does a
different thing than the confirm option: it asks to check the
_contents_ of each email, whereas --confirm asks to check sender,
recipients, and subjects. So from my pov 2 options actually make
sense.
> It could be nice if the two kind of prompts could be unified
> somehow. That is however probably hard to do while preserving
> backward compatibility. The fact that it is an interactive command
> makes scripting less of an issue, but still there might be some
> users that are used to rely on the prompts and would get an
> unpleasant surprise if it was changed ...
One could consider to merge at least the final diffstat for the
whole series into the --confirm prompt. otoh this would muddle
up the purposes of the 2 boolean prompts again.
> IMHO, ideally --diffstat should _only_ cause diffstat to be put in
> the mails. It would be fine with me if --confirm always showed
> diffstat together with each subject and was the only way to get a
> confirmation prompt.
Perhaps users of --diffstat should chime in. Was implementing the
prompt after each mail in the series intentional?
For the moment however, I'd prefer --confirm to be treated
separately, and not mixed up either with --diffstat or the
handling of Cc prompts, like it happened in February. Otherwise
this just left hanging in the air again. Which is a long version
of saying: I think the 2 remaining patches should go in -- *if*
we want the confirm feature.
c
--
\black\trash movie _MORALISK ANSTALT_
"Nix verstanden."
--->> http://www.blacktrash.org/underdogma/moraliskanstalt.php
More information about the Mercurial-devel
mailing list