[PATCH] annotate: introduce file extension specific annotate options

[Angel Ezquerra]

On Jun 22, 2012 10:16 PM, "Matt Mackall" <mpm at selenic.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 2012-06-21 at 07:42 +0200, Angel Ezquerra wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 12:14 AM, Matt Mackall <mpm at selenic.com> wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2012-06-19 at 23:02 +0200, Angel Ezquerra wrote:
> > >> # HG changeset patch
> > >> # User Angel Ezquerra <angel.ezquerra at gmail.com>
> > >> # Date 1340139680 -7200
> > >> # Node ID bc99abe9b3796d363c1952e3255428f18af91568
> > >> # Parent  132ea1736751cb02b16992cf421e7de8bad888a1
> > >> annotate: introduce file extension specific annotate options
> > >
> > > Not excited about this. Basically, at this point, if this is the first
> > > time I'm hearing about some feature idea for a basic command, I'll
> > > probably think "we've gotten along this far without it, why do we want
> > > yet another obscure command-specific option/config section?"
> >
> > I think that while "annotate" is a basic command (i.e. it is bundled
> > with core mercurial), it is not really a "basic" command, in the sense
> > that you can use mercurial very productively without ever having to
> > use or even know about annotate. My point is that mercurial could
> > "have gotten along this far" even without an annotate command at all.
> > I'm not surprised that there we haven't felt the need to tweak or
> > improve annotate much.
>
> I'm not sure why when I say "I don't want to add new command line
> options unless they're very valuable", you think "but no one cares about
> this command" helps your case.

I felt that I had addressed the "why this is valuable" question later in my
previous email. I first tried to address the "why haven't we heard of this
before?" question. It seems I didn't do such a good job answering either of
them!

Anyway, I think Mads' suggestion that this may want to be an extension is a
sound one. Thank you for taking the time to discus this anyway.

As an aside, I find that the Spanish and English/American discussion styles
are quite different sometimes... For example I'm now not completely sure
that you really wanted me to even try to make a case for this patch after
your previous email. Where you trying to tell me that the answer was a
final "no"? You using the words "not excited" and "I'll probably think" led
me to think you wanted to discuss this some more...

Angel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://selenic.com/pipermail/mercurial-devel/attachments/20120623/33dccb34/attachment.html>