[PATCH 3 of 3 v4] help: mark boolean flags with [?] and explain that they can be negated (RFC)

kbullock+mercurial at ringworld.org kbullock+mercurial at ringworld.org
Sat Sep 17 17:26:01 EDT 2016


> On Sep 17, 2016, at 02:58, Yuya Nishihara <yuya at tcha.org> wrote:
> 
> On Fri, 16 Sep 2016 11:15:03 -0400, Augie Fackler wrote:
>> # HG changeset patch
>> # User Augie Fackler <augie at google.com>
>> # Date 1473821892 14400
>> #      Tue Sep 13 22:58:12 2016 -0400
>> # Node ID bc6e18d8c469a1671c2d6725da5771fed3972323
>> # Parent  aea18fa52d954e234fdfd1d24d3f37f0cb03dc60
>> help: mark boolean flags with [?] and explain that they can be negated (RFC)
>> 
>> This is an RFC because I'm still not crazy about how this is
>> documented - perhaps we should add some text discussing what it means
>> for a flag to be a boolean flag and be negatable?
> 
> I'm not opposed to this change, but it appears we aren't sure how this should
> be documented yet. So I don't take this patch for now.

I'm pretty comfortable with the [?] marking the boolean flags, but I do think we need some further cogitation on how to help users learn the `--no-whatever` syntax for negating them. I don't have a good suggestion yet.

pacem in terris / мир / शान्ति / ‎‫سَلاَم‬ / 平和
Kevin R. Bullock



More information about the Mercurial-devel mailing list