You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@subversion.apache.org by Tyler Winter Mace <tw...@thermoanalytics.com> on 2008/08/22 17:25:33 UTC
setprop vs. propset
Hey, I've requested a new minor feature and wanted some thoughts on it.
I have trouble using the "propset" and "propget" (etc) commands. Almost
every time, I type "setprop" or "getprop." That's because I want to
"set" a "property" and that's how I expect the command to be when I type
it on the command line.
Does anyone else have this issue? Are there other ideas as to resolve this?
See also,
*http://subversion.tigris.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3268*
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: setprop vs. propset
Posted by Andreas Schweigstill <an...@schweigstill.de>.
Hello!
Kevin Grover schrieb:
> No problem for me at all. I have no trouble remembering them, perhaps
> because I always use the abbreviations. Just think of the commands as
> postfix rather than prefix ;-)
Me too.
I see something like a command tree in my mind:
prop
|--set
|--get
|--edit
|--del
Especially if Subversion supported command line completion it would be
much easier to type "prop" <TAB><TAB> in order to see which actions
could be performed on a property.
When doing software development I prefer a name convention like
module_action_property() or ModuleActionProperty(), like
lcd_clear_display(). When a new project is based on some existing code
I even prefer to use project_module_action_property() in order to be
able to distinguish between my own new code and existing code, e.g.
U-Boot or Linux kernel sources.
Regards
Andreas Schweigstill
--
Dipl.-Phys. Andreas Schweigstill
Schweigstill IT | Embedded Systems
Schauenburgerstraße 116, D-24118 Kiel, Germany
Phone: (+49) 431 5606-435, Fax: (+49) 431 5606-436
Mobile: (+49) 171 6921973, Web: http://www.schweigstill.de/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: setprop vs. propset
Posted by Kevin Grover <ke...@kevingrover.net>.
On Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 10:25 AM, Tyler Winter Mace <twm@thermoanalytics.com
> wrote:
> Hey, I've requested a new minor feature and wanted some thoughts on it.
>
> I have trouble using the "propset" and "propget" (etc) commands. Almost
> every time, I type "setprop" or "getprop." That's because I want to "set" a
> "property" and that's how I expect the command to be when I type it on the
> command line.
>
> Does anyone else have this issue? Are there other ideas as to resolve this?
>
>
No problem for me at all. I have no trouble remembering them, perhaps
because I always use the abbreviations. Just think of the commands as
postfix rather than prefix ;-)
- Kevin
Re: setprop vs. propset
Posted by Branko Čibej <br...@xbc.nu>.
Karl Fogel wrote:
> (Note that "praise" was added largely for humor -- I think it was worth
> it, too :-) ).
>
<span style="mood: stiff-upper-lip>
The only important reason was to make Subversion more easily accepted in
a corporate environment. Assignment of blame is frowned upon as it does
not promote teamwork.
</span>
That said, it was added largely for humour, not humor. :-P
-- Brane
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: setprop vs. propset
Posted by Karl Fogel <kf...@red-bean.com>.
Julian Foad <ju...@btopenworld.com> writes:
> Certainly - if individuals want to create their own wrappers and aliases
> for "svn" and/or its subcommands, they are welcome to do so.
>
> I didn't speak up before but I am also -1 on adding more aliases. Mainly
> because they create more entropy which makes various scripting,
> communication and maintenance tasks more burdensome without adding a
> corresponding amount of value. For example, the book gets longer, the
> examples get more inconsistent, or inconsistent with what a user prefers
> to type, the wrapper scripts that people write around "svn" get longer,
> the patch reviews start having bikeshed discussions about which we
> should prefer and promote in examples and in our maintained scripts, and
> so on.
>
> Also because it is an open-ended specification: there is no limit to the
> number of aliases that people could claim to be "useful", so the
> "improvement" could never be "complete".
>
> I do accept that the command "setprop" may be easier to remember than
> (or at least as easy as) "propset". If we'd had it that way around from
> the start, we might not be having this discussion. It's just that I
> believe the various small disadvantages of adding more aliases would
> accumulate to make the whole Subversion universe in the end worse than
> (or at least no better than) the way it is now where the problem is just
> that some commands are less easy to remember than we would like.
>
> (The fact that we already have some aliases that don't serve a useful
> purpose, such as "praise", perhaps makes some people think it would be
> OK to go on adding more aliases, and doesn't help my argument, but it's
> too late to remove them now.)
What he said.
(Note that "praise" was added largely for humor -- I think it was worth
it, too :-) ).
-K
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: setprop vs. propset
Posted by Julian Foad <ju...@btopenworld.com>.
On Thu, 2008-08-28 at 13:04 +0200, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 03:09:15PM -0400, Karl Fogel wrote:
> > Neels Hofmeyr <ne...@elego.de> writes:
> > > The second one could be paraphrased: "To make it easier to type a
> > > subcommand". IMHO, `setprop' sits much better in my brain, to the degree
> > > that it involuntarily turns `propset' around do `setprop'.
> > >
> > > Once that's there, I'd expect `sp' to work as well.
> >
> > But alias space doesn't come free, remember. Someday later, we might
> > want 'sp' for "show patch". Or whatever, I don't know -- the point is,
> > if we expand too many commands into large equivalence classes, those
> > classes will inevitably start to interfere with future commands.
> >
> > I think that introducing "setprop" is not actually a good idea. The
> > vast majority of people are not even using the command-line client at
> > all; of those who are, very few have complained about this. I
> > understand that for them it's a real issue -- I am not trying to deny
> > this. But I'm not sure the cost of fixing it is worth the gain. Having
> > "setprop" does imply having "sp"; having "sp"; likewise with "getprop"
> > and "gp". We shouldn't close off alias space for such small gains.
>
> Another obvious alternative to a patch to Subversion would be
> an 'svn' wrapper script that does the setprop -> propset etc.
> translation.
>
> Given that apparently only few people really care about this, and
> that there is resistence in the developer community towards this change,
> should we just tell people to create such a wrapper script / shell
> function instead?
Certainly - if individuals want to create their own wrappers and aliases
for "svn" and/or its subcommands, they are welcome to do so.
I didn't speak up before but I am also -1 on adding more aliases. Mainly
because they create more entropy which makes various scripting,
communication and maintenance tasks more burdensome without adding a
corresponding amount of value. For example, the book gets longer, the
examples get more inconsistent, or inconsistent with what a user prefers
to type, the wrapper scripts that people write around "svn" get longer,
the patch reviews start having bikeshed discussions about which we
should prefer and promote in examples and in our maintained scripts, and
so on.
Also because it is an open-ended specification: there is no limit to the
number of aliases that people could claim to be "useful", so the
"improvement" could never be "complete".
I do accept that the command "setprop" may be easier to remember than
(or at least as easy as) "propset". If we'd had it that way around from
the start, we might not be having this discussion. It's just that I
believe the various small disadvantages of adding more aliases would
accumulate to make the whole Subversion universe in the end worse than
(or at least no better than) the way it is now where the problem is just
that some commands are less easy to remember than we would like.
(The fact that we already have some aliases that don't serve a useful
purpose, such as "praise", perhaps makes some people think it would be
OK to go on adding more aliases, and doesn't help my argument, but it's
too late to remove them now.)
> If so, we could close issue #3268 as WONTFIX.
+1. Done.
- Julian
> I personally still think it's a usability issue with our command
> line client, and would like to see the whole set of aliases added.
>
> But there is no point in adding them unless there is consensus among
> developers about this change, which does not seem to be in sight.
>
> Stefan
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: setprop vs. propset
Posted by Stefan Sperling <st...@elego.de>.
On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 03:09:15PM -0400, Karl Fogel wrote:
> Neels Hofmeyr <ne...@elego.de> writes:
> > The second one could be paraphrased: "To make it easier to type a
> > subcommand". IMHO, `setprop' sits much better in my brain, to the degree
> > that it involuntarily turns `propset' around do `setprop'.
> >
> > Once that's there, I'd expect `sp' to work as well.
>
> But alias space doesn't come free, remember. Someday later, we might
> want 'sp' for "show patch". Or whatever, I don't know -- the point is,
> if we expand too many commands into large equivalence classes, those
> classes will inevitably start to interfere with future commands.
>
> I think that introducing "setprop" is not actually a good idea. The
> vast majority of people are not even using the command-line client at
> all; of those who are, very few have complained about this. I
> understand that for them it's a real issue -- I am not trying to deny
> this. But I'm not sure the cost of fixing it is worth the gain. Having
> "setprop" does imply having "sp"; having "sp"; likewise with "getprop"
> and "gp". We shouldn't close off alias space for such small gains.
Another obvious alternative to a patch to Subversion would be
an 'svn' wrapper script that does the setprop -> propset etc.
translation.
Given that apparently only few people really care about this, and
that there is resistence in the developer community towards this change,
should we just tell people to create such a wrapper script / shell
function instead?
If so, we could close issue #3268 as WONTFIX.
I personally still think it's a usability issue with our command
line client, and would like to see the whole set of aliases added.
But there is no point in adding them unless there is consensus among
developers about this change, which does not seem to be in sight.
Stefan
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: setprop vs. propset
Posted by Neels Hofmeyr <ne...@elego.de>.
Karl Fogel wrote:
> Neels Hofmeyr <ne...@elego.de> writes:
>> The second one could be paraphrased: "To make it easier to type a
>> subcommand". IMHO, `setprop' sits much better in my brain, to the degree
>> that it involuntarily turns `propset' around do `setprop'.
>>
>> Once that's there, I'd expect `sp' to work as well.
>
> But alias space doesn't come free, remember. Someday later, we might
> want 'sp' for "show patch". Or whatever, I don't know -- the point is,
> if we expand too many commands into large equivalence classes, those
> classes will inevitably start to interfere with future commands.
>
> I think that introducing "setprop" is not actually a good idea. The
> vast majority of people are not even using the command-line client at
> all; of those who are, very few have complained about this. I
> understand that for them it's a real issue -- I am not trying to deny
> this. But I'm not sure the cost of fixing it is worth the gain. Having
> "setprop" does imply having "sp"; having "sp"; likewise with "getprop"
> and "gp". We shouldn't close off alias space for such small gains.
>
> -Karl
At that angle, I agree. AFAIK, most left-handed people have actually learnt
to cut with right-handed scissors, svn commandline users can be expected to
do the "same" for the benefit of alias space and simplicity.
;)
--
Neels Hofmeyr -- elego Software Solutions GmbH
Gustav-Meyer-Allee 25 / Gebäude 12, 13355 Berlin, Germany
phone: +49 30 23458696 mobile: +49 177 2345869 fax: +49 30 23458695
http://www.elegosoft.com | Geschäftsführer: Olaf Wagner | Sitz: Berlin
Handelsreg: Amtsgericht Charlottenburg HRB 77719 | USt-IdNr: DE163214194
Re: setprop vs. propset
Posted by Karl Fogel <kf...@red-bean.com>.
Neels Hofmeyr <ne...@elego.de> writes:
> The second one could be paraphrased: "To make it easier to type a
> subcommand". IMHO, `setprop' sits much better in my brain, to the degree
> that it involuntarily turns `propset' around do `setprop'.
>
> Once that's there, I'd expect `sp' to work as well.
But alias space doesn't come free, remember. Someday later, we might
want 'sp' for "show patch". Or whatever, I don't know -- the point is,
if we expand too many commands into large equivalence classes, those
classes will inevitably start to interfere with future commands.
I think that introducing "setprop" is not actually a good idea. The
vast majority of people are not even using the command-line client at
all; of those who are, very few have complained about this. I
understand that for them it's a real issue -- I am not trying to deny
this. But I'm not sure the cost of fixing it is worth the gain. Having
"setprop" does imply having "sp"; having "sp"; likewise with "getprop"
and "gp". We shouldn't close off alias space for such small gains.
-Karl
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: setprop vs. propset
Posted by Neels Hofmeyr <ne...@elego.de>.
Stefan Sperling wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 23, 2008 at 09:18:10AM -0400, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
>> Stefan Sperling wrote:
>>> And while I agree that adding too many aliases for commands can
>>> lead to a confusing UI in the long term, I don't think that it
>>> will cause confusion in this particular case.
>> Let's face the facts, here: most of our commands have aliases for one of
>> two reasons:
>>
>> * To match the name/alias of the similar CVS subcommand
>> * To provide a shorter thing to type for especially long subcommands
The second one could be paraphrased: "To make it easier to type a
subcommand". IMHO, `setprop' sits much better in my brain, to the degree
that it involuntarily turns `propset' around do `setprop'.
Once that's there, I'd expect `sp' to work as well.
I think the reason to accept these aliases is almost the same as the reason
why you can buy left-handed scissors. The UI should be easily usable.
It's a rather special case, which arises from common English, and
programming style of having "get" or "set" first in a function name, and
from people having used this so much that we are left-handed about it.
It also arises from the fact that the commands are not subdivided as in `svn
prop --set' (one could argue this one to favor propset, though).
...I guess we have all the bikeshed colors by now ;) Who decides?
--
Neels Hofmeyr -- elego Software Solutions GmbH
Gustav-Meyer-Allee 25 / Gebäude 12, 13355 Berlin, Germany
phone: +49 30 23458696 mobile: +49 177 2345869 fax: +49 30 23458695
http://www.elegosoft.com | Geschäftsführer: Olaf Wagner | Sitz: Berlin
Handelsreg: Amtsgericht Charlottenburg HRB 77719 | USt-IdNr: DE163214194
Re: setprop vs. propset
Posted by Stefan Sperling <st...@elego.de>.
On Sat, Aug 23, 2008 at 09:18:10AM -0400, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
> Stefan Sperling wrote:
> > And while I agree that adding too many aliases for commands can
> > lead to a confusing UI in the long term, I don't think that it
> > will cause confusion in this particular case.
>
> Let's face the facts, here: most of our commands have aliases for one of
> two reasons:
>
> * To match the name/alias of the similar CVS subcommand
> * To provide a shorter thing to type for especially long subcommands
OK. I don't think these reasons are documented anywhere, but they
sound sane. I thought we had aliases primarily so Subversion can be
used intuitively from the command line (e.g. "svn mv" and "svn ren"
match renaming commands from different operating systems).
> This change matches neither criteria. CVS has no property setting
> functionality, and our property commands already have short aliases. That
> one guy has a problem remembering the subcommand name is just too bad for
> that one guy -- clearly this problem hasn't plagued others over the past six
> years (or at least enough for them to complain about it).
Well, lack of reports does not necessary imply that no one else
ever hits this problem, but we can hardly collect data on this.
> It's not as if
> 'svn help' is hard to type; it's not as if the world ends if you pick a
> bogus subcommand name.
Heh, we do indeed have much bigger usability issues than this
particular one, yes :)
> So, while sanity compels me to tell you to drop this patch and discussion,
s/sanity/the reasons you stated why aliases exist/ ?
> I'm willing to give some ground here: I'm fine with you adding the
> longest-form aliases here (delprop, editprop, etc.), but not the medium- or
> small-sized ones.
Which is exactly what that one guy wanted, so that's enough ground
to make him happy :)
I added the shorter aliases in my patch for two reasons:
1. Consistency.
2. To prevent some future command from using an alias matching
them, to avoid ambiguity.
I don't care to much about them, though.
Stefan
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: setprop vs. propset
Posted by "C. Michael Pilato" <cm...@collab.net>.
Stefan Sperling wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 23, 2008 at 10:05:26AM +0200, Jens Seidel wrote:
>> On Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 07:05:18PM -0500, Peter Samuelson wrote:
>>> [Tyler Winter Mace]
>>>> I have trouble using the "propset" and "propget" (etc) commands. Almost
>>>> every time, I type "setprop" or "getprop." That's because I want to "set"
>>>> a "property" and that's how I expect the command to be when I type it on
>>>> the command line.
>>> Probably the simplest thing is just to get used to the abbreviations
>>> pl, pg, ps, pe, pd. If you think of a group of 5 two-letter commands
>>> with a common one-letter prefix, it should be easy to remember it isn't
>>> a common one-letter suffix. Or maybe it's just me. As Jay Ashworth
>>> says, so many things are just me.
>> Oh, yes, it's just you :-)
>
> Note that there is a patch attached to the issue #3268 already:
> http://subversion.tigris.org/nonav/issues/showattachment.cgi/926/svn-prop-aliases.diff
>
> It's trivial to add these aliases. I am perfectly fine with
> adding them, and I'd like to commit the patch.
>
> The patch adds all of the following aliases:
>
> delprop, delp, dp,
> editprop, editp, ep,
> getprop, getp, gp,
> listprop, listp, lp,
> setprop, setp, sp
>
> The whole point of this thread should be that anyone who does not
> want these aliases to be added for whatever reason please speak up now.
>
> But please give a good reason. I personally can't come up with of any
> other counter argument than "please let's not add more and more aliases
> because we will end up with way too many of them, cluttering the UI."
>
> And while I agree that adding too many aliases for commands can
> lead to a confusing UI in the long term, I don't think that it
> will cause confusion in this particular case.
Let's face the facts, here: most of our commands have aliases for one of
two reasons:
* To match the name/alias of the similar CVS subcommand
* To provide a shorter thing to type for especially long subcommands
This change matches neither criteria. CVS has no property setting
functionality, and our property commands already have short aliases. That
one guy has a problem remembering the subcommand name is just too bad for
that one guy -- clearly this problem hasn't plagued others over the past six
years (or at least enough for them to complain about it). It's not as if
'svn help' is hard to type; it's not as if the world ends if you pick a
bogus subcommand name.
So, while sanity compels me to tell you to drop this patch and discussion,
I'm willing to give some ground here: I'm fine with you adding the
longest-form aliases here (delprop, editprop, etc.), but not the medium- or
small-sized ones.
--
C. Michael Pilato <cm...@collab.net>
CollabNet <> www.collab.net <> Distributed Development On Demand
Re: setprop vs. propset
Posted by Stefan Sperling <st...@elego.de>.
On Sat, Aug 23, 2008 at 10:05:26AM +0200, Jens Seidel wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 07:05:18PM -0500, Peter Samuelson wrote:
> > [Tyler Winter Mace]
> > > I have trouble using the "propset" and "propget" (etc) commands. Almost
> > > every time, I type "setprop" or "getprop." That's because I want to "set"
> > > a "property" and that's how I expect the command to be when I type it on
> > > the command line.
> >
> > Probably the simplest thing is just to get used to the abbreviations
> > pl, pg, ps, pe, pd. If you think of a group of 5 two-letter commands
> > with a common one-letter prefix, it should be easy to remember it isn't
> > a common one-letter suffix. Or maybe it's just me. As Jay Ashworth
> > says, so many things are just me.
>
> Oh, yes, it's just you :-)
Note that there is a patch attached to the issue #3268 already:
http://subversion.tigris.org/nonav/issues/showattachment.cgi/926/svn-prop-aliases.diff
It's trivial to add these aliases. I am perfectly fine with
adding them, and I'd like to commit the patch.
The patch adds all of the following aliases:
delprop, delp, dp,
editprop, editp, ep,
getprop, getp, gp,
listprop, listp, lp,
setprop, setp, sp
The whole point of this thread should be that anyone who does not
want these aliases to be added for whatever reason please speak up now.
But please give a good reason. I personally can't come up with of any
other counter argument than "please let's not add more and more aliases
because we will end up with way too many of them, cluttering the UI."
And while I agree that adding too many aliases for commands can
lead to a confusing UI in the long term, I don't think that it
will cause confusion in this particular case.
"svn setprop" parses just as well as "svn propset", maybe even better
because setprop follows proper English word order more closely.
Adding these aliases makes the svn program easier to use.
Humans are notoriously bad at remembering little details such as the
order of two particular syllables which make up a command.
I wish my editor was as forgiving whenever I type ":set tabexpand"
instead of ":set expandtab" (or which way was it again? :)
For reference, here is what the relevant part of the 'svn help'
output looks like after applying the patch:
Available subcommands:
add
blame (praise, annotate, ann)
cat
changelist (cl)
checkout (co)
cleanup
commit (ci)
copy (cp)
delete (del, remove, rm)
diff (di)
export
help (?, h)
import
info
list (ls)
lock
log
merge
mergeinfo
mkdir
move (mv, rename, ren)
propdel (pdel, pd, delprop, delp, dp)
propedit (pedit, pe, editprop, editp, ep)
propget (pget, pg, getprop, getp, gp)
proplist (plist, pl, listprop, listp, lp)
propset (pset, ps, setprop, setp, sp)
resolve
resolved
revert
status (stat, st)
switch (sw)
unlock
update (up)
Note that the prop* commands are the only commands that logically
consist of two seperate words. So this is *not* a precedent of
adding more and more aliases to every command just for the sake of it.
Stefan
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: setprop vs. propset
Posted by Andreas Schweigstill <an...@schweigstill.de>.
Hello!
Jens Seidel schrieb:
> It is easier for shortcuts such as "ci" for
> "commit" because this is also supported by CVS nevertheless I strongly
> suggest to use the long form in examples and to reproduce bugs ...
And even CVS stole, ehh inherited the "ci" from RCS's stand-alone
program "ci". In RCS/CVS terms it is not used for "commit" but for
"check in", so it follows the same convention as for ps, pe, etc..
Regards
Andreas Schweigstill
--
Dipl.-Phys. Andreas Schweigstill
Schweigstill IT | Embedded Systems
Schauenburgerstraße 116, D-24118 Kiel, Germany
Phone: (+49) 431 5606-435, Fax: (+49) 431 5606-436
Mobile: (+49) 171 6921973, Web: http://www.schweigstill.de/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: setprop vs. propset
Posted by Jens Seidel <je...@users.sourceforge.net>.
On Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 07:05:18PM -0500, Peter Samuelson wrote:
> [Tyler Winter Mace]
> > I have trouble using the "propset" and "propget" (etc) commands. Almost
> > every time, I type "setprop" or "getprop." That's because I want to "set"
> > a "property" and that's how I expect the command to be when I type it on
> > the command line.
>
> Probably the simplest thing is just to get used to the abbreviations
> pl, pg, ps, pe, pd. If you think of a group of 5 two-letter commands
> with a common one-letter prefix, it should be easy to remember it isn't
> a common one-letter suffix. Or maybe it's just me. As Jay Ashworth
> says, so many things are just me.
Oh, yes, it's just you :-) Using the two-letter abbreviations is the
worst thing I can imagine and I have always trouble guessing the proper
command name from it. It is easier for shortcuts such as "ci" for
"commit" because this is also supported by CVS nevertheless I strongly
suggest to use the long form in examples and to reproduce bugs ...
I also tried already to use "setprop" but once I get an error message I
just continue trying "propset" (or "propertyset, ...) so I find the
proper command usually after not more than two guesses. "pg" I used
never in the past ...
Jens
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: setprop vs. propset
Posted by Peter Samuelson <pe...@p12n.org>.
[Tyler Winter Mace]
> I have trouble using the "propset" and "propget" (etc) commands. Almost
> every time, I type "setprop" or "getprop." That's because I want to "set"
> a "property" and that's how I expect the command to be when I type it on
> the command line.
Probably the simplest thing is just to get used to the abbreviations
pl, pg, ps, pe, pd. If you think of a group of 5 two-letter commands
with a common one-letter prefix, it should be easy to remember it isn't
a common one-letter suffix. Or maybe it's just me. As Jay Ashworth
says, so many things are just me.
--
Peter Samuelson | org-tld!p12n!peter | http://p12n.org/