Re: [Monotone-devel] Error handling via automate

[Daniel Carosone]

On Sat, Sep 09, 2006 at 06:57:51PM -0700, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
> Another possibility in this particular case would be "automate update"
> simply require that the caller provide the target revision; then this
> error can't happen.  Instead, the caller would go to get the target
> for the update, discover there were multiple candidates, and then ask
> the user (or whatever) before calling update at all.

Sounds good.

> > resolve it and in this case a native error would be far better than an
> > English one.
> 
> Possibly the structure of SMTP/HTTP/FTP/... style response codes are a
> useful precedent?  Or possibly there should be a small set of errors
> defined on a per-command basis?

Would an 'automate' locale/translation, with machine-friendly messages
like this, be unreasonable?

--
Dan.

pgp6Y4Ff1xh5r.pgp
Description: PGP signature