[PATCH 1 of 3 STABLE V2] pager: rename 'pager.enable' to 'ui.pager'

[Augie Fackler]

> On May 2, 2017, at 09:57, Yuya Nishihara <yuya at tcha.org> wrote:
> 
> On Tue, 2 May 2017 13:03:46 +0200, Pierre-Yves David wrote:
>> On 05/02/2017 04:34 AM, Yuya Nishihara wrote:
>>> On Mon, 1 May 2017 21:22:02 -0400, Augie Fackler wrote:
>>>> On Mon, May 01, 2017 at 10:29:21PM +0200, Pierre-Yves David wrote:
>>>>> # HG changeset patch
>>>>> # User Pierre-Yves David <pierre-yves.david at ens-lyon.org>
>>>>> # Date 1493649410 -7200
>>>>> #      Mon May 01 16:36:50 2017 +0200
>>>>> # Branch stable
>>>>> # Node ID 853bf9ca7b3b1f4d8f54ed8c60ff92371132c097
>>>>> # Parent  ad70a36b5b472c295bfdb849ba69eac871305b36
>>>>> # EXP-Topic pager
>>>>> # Available At https://www.mercurial-scm.org/repo/users/marmoute/mercurial/
>>>>> #              hg pull https://www.mercurial-scm.org/repo/users/marmoute/mercurial/ -r 853bf9ca7b3b
>>>>> pager: rename 'pager.enable' to 'ui.pager'
>>>> 
>>>> Mentioned this on the other thread, but in brief here so it doesn't
>>>> get overlooked: I think ui.pager is confusing as a boolean when
>>>> ui.editor already exists and is a program to invoke. They sound
>>>> related to me.
>>> 
>>> Agreed. pager.enable is a bit unfortunate, but 'ui.pager = <bool>' is more
>>> confusing.
>> 
>> Given that gathering main interface knob in `[ui]`, maybe we can find 
>> something else that fit both constraint (in [ui]; not confusing with 
>> ui.editor).
>> 
>> I can think about `ui.use-pager` and `ui.paginate`.
>> 
>> What do you think ?
> 
> +0. I'm not so enthusiastic about moving things into the [ui] section.

I don't feel terribly strongly either way on moving things to [ui] - I see both sides of the argument. I think paginate is better than use-pager.

> 
>> (On related new, `pager.enable=<bool>` seems a bit off with 
>> `pager.ignore=<list>`. Especially since we need a counter-part to 
>> `pager.ignore=<list>` that could be `pager.enable=<list>`)
> 
> IIRC, pager.ignore is kinda deprecated since the list can't be partially
> overridden. Modern way is to set pager.attend-<command>.

Right now we don't have a way (other than the deprecated pager extension) to forcibly paginate a command that doesn't request pagination. That might be a better use for pager.enable=<list> than the existing pager.enable=<bool> when viewed in light of the existing pager.ignore setting.

Kevin, what do you think? I'd like to get this sorted today so we can release today.