[Gnu-arch-users] Re: GNU Arch review - am I accurate?

[Stefan Monnier]

> - Prefix for the log file: Since tla make-log returns full path,
>   any-editor $(tla make-log)
>   works correctly. Actualy, I always do "vi +ArchLog" anyway.

Given that a log file is completely unnecessary (you can use the
"CVS-style" of passing a log without ever noticing that you could use
`make-log').

> - Name for the arch directory. {arch} has a nice feature of sorting
>   after anything else (only |, } and ~ sort after {).

Sorting after everything else means that it prints right next to the
prompt, i.e. it prints where I'm looking which is rather silly since
I don't want to see it, usually.
Given all the discussions on the cvs-info list way back when it's hard to
believe that someone might come around and choose {arch} rather than say
.arch [ But then again, someone else chose MCVS even though he obviously
can't claim he knows nothing about CVS. ]

>   Since one seldom needs to work with files there manualy, I can live with
>   typing extra \ time to time (in addition, in bash {<Tab> completes
>   correctly to \{arch\})

But if it was .arch, it would be automatically ignored by *, completion,
ls, ... i.e. it would *just work*.

> (or better, make tla use ~/.arch-params/=tagging-method if it exists).

That would be helpful, indeed.


        Stefan