RFC: Phase UI (revset, phase command and others)

[Alain Leufroy]

On Wed, 28 Dec 2011, Pierre-Yves David wrote:


>
> On 27 déc. 2011, at 23:59, Jesper Schmidt wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 27 Dec 2011 00:11:12 +0100, Pierre-Yves David <pierre-yves.david at ens-lyon.org> wrote:
> >
> >> Phase name
> >> ============
> >>
> >> The current naming scheme is:
> >>
> >>           immutable shared
> >>   public:     X        X
> >>   draft:               X
> >>   secret:
> >>
> >> The two rules leading to such scheme are:
> >>
> >> 1) Thou shalt not pick phases name whose initial clash with each other.
> >>   (eg: no Public/Private)
> >>
> > Too bad, because I prefer 'private' over 'secret'. When I hear secret,
> > I cannot help thinking about security levels, which is not very helpful
> > in this context. Private, on the other hand, leads me in the right
> > direction as being the opposite of public.
>
> We won't have both private and public as phase name. If you like private you need to make proposal to replace public.

looking for synonyms :P

- confidential
- sequestered
- underground
- inward
- obscure
- concealed

>
>
> >> Phase command
> >> =============
> >>
> >> Phase of changeset can be manually altered with the "hg phases" command
> >>
> >
> > Have you considered using a verb instead of a noun? Nouns are normally used
> > to show stuff while verbs indicate that the command changes some state.
> >
> > What about using 'hg promote' to manually promoting a changeset to a higher
> > phase and 'hg demote' to manually demoting it to a lower phase. I like the
> > fact that you need to express your intention (promoting or demoting)
> > explicitly, when you are assigning phases manually.
>
> This proposal is interesting at first glance but getting the --exact behavior will require to use two command which don't seem very practical. But "promote" and "demote" verbs are interesting.
>
>

-- 
Alain Leufroy
LOGILAB, Paris (France)
http://www.logilab.fr
Informatique scientifique & gestion de connaissances