Some initial impressions of phases
Laurens Holst
laurens.nospam at grauw.nl
Tue Jan 24 04:03:19 CST 2012
Op 24-01-12 09:14, Jason Harris schreef:
>>> Point 10.
>>>
>>> This still has public< draft< secret. Wasn't it decided to use private rather than secret?
>> Well, the choice was public/draft/secret + short opts or
>> public/draft/private + only long opts. Since insufficient enthusiasm was
>> expressed for the latter, we're sticking with the former.
> What? I thought most everyone commenting on email preferred the second one, or they had
> a different opinion. Some people wanted different names, but of the names which most people
> agreed on, secret was not the preferred name. For the reasons I and others have articulated
> it's a bad name.
I’m fine with secret, I think the name implies the correct semantics
this phase should have. So I didn’t respond to that thread, which was
about searching for an alternative, not a vote (besides, Mercurial is no
democracy).
Also that discussion was started before it was decided to give the
secret/private phase stricter semantics in terms of when and how it is
shared. Also later it turned out that using the name private would mean
that there will be no short options. Most of the mails were responding
based on different assumptions.
~Laurens
More information about the Mercurial-devel
mailing list