[PATCH RFC] rename manifest command to files

[Didly]

On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 4:35 AM, Jason Harris <jason at jasonfharris.com> wrote:
>
> On Apr 30, 2011, at 12:55 AM, Adrian Buehlmann wrote:
>
>> (a friendly reminder: please don't top post)
>>
>> On 2011-04-30 00:00, Jason Harris wrote:
>>> Just my 2c but...
>>>
>>> Files seems too generic to me...
>>
>> I don't think so.
>>
>> 'hg files' could be (warning: that's not how 'hg manifest' is currently
>> implemented):
>>
>>  $ hg files -r .
>>
>>  -> show the files in the first parent revision
>>
>>  $ hg files
>>
>>  -> show the working dir files (includes added but not yet
>>     committed files)
>>
>>  $ hg file -r a6342b342
>>
>>  -> show all files in that revision
>>
>>  $ hg files --all
>>
>>  -> show all files that have been committed in any revision of
>>     the repo
>>
>> So we might end up subsuming under 'hg files': "the files known by
>> Mercurial in some way").
>>
>>> Manifest is telling you:
>>
>> Almost nothing, especially if you see in the first line of the help text:
>>
>> "output the current or given revision of the project manifest"
>>
>> So, it's telling you that a manifest is a manifest ;-)
>>
>> IMHO manifest is quite confusing, since the user naturally asks the
>> question "what files are in x" and not "please give me your manifest",
>> which almost sounds like that's something the communist party has
>> written :-) (especially for non-English users, like for example Germans).
>>
>>> manifest (2):
>>> noun
>>> a document giving comprehensive details of a ship and its cargo and other contents, passengers, and crew for the use of customs officers.
>>> • a list of passengers or cargo in an aircraft.
>>> • a list of the cars forming a freight train.
>>
>> Which is quite meaningless in the scope of a VCS. What is your aircraft
>> here?
>
> I just copied the dictionary definition. Which basically means that the 'manifest' is a detailed list of the contents of something.
>
> 'Files' is just too generic in my opinion and could mean lots of things. I am not staunch on this point, in the sense that 'files' would not be *terrible* but I just think it's a tad too generic (in my opinion...)
>
> And as a native english speaker 'manifest' is fairly distinctive and is evocative of its intended function in mercurial.
>
> Cheers,
>   Jas
>
>> FWIW, in the scope of an aircraft, I would expect to have a command
>>
>>  $ hg passengers
>>
>> Which would be quite expressive.
>>
>> Manifest is an isolated artificial term in Mercurial, which doesn't
>> appear anywhere else on the user interface (setting debugland aside).
>>
>> We already have the concepts of revisions, files, changesets, tags,
>> bookmarks, branches and heads in Mercurial. These all make sense for a
>> user. But manifest is a weird artificial term on the user interface of a
>> VCS. As already hinted in my patch change message: it's a notion leaking
>> from the implementation level.
>

I agree with Adrian. As a non-native English speaker, I find manifest
to be a pretty uncommon word and really not as descriptive as "files".
"files" may I be a bit generic, but "manifest" feels arcane. I bet
that very few non-native speakers know the meaning of that word.

Probably a bit of topic, but for native-Spanish speakers (such as
myself) "manifest" is not only uncommon but also confusing. The
spelling of "manifest" is very similar to that of two Spanish words:
"manifiesto" and "manifestar", yet their meanings are not similar at
all.

So +1 to Adrian's proposal, as long as the original command is kept
for compatibility reasons.

Angel