Message-ID: <41BDFD93.70605@mpathix.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 15:37:39 -0500
From: Milan Cvetkovic <milan.cvetkovic@mpathix.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.3.1) Gecko/20030425
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Mikhael Goikhman <migo@homemail.com>
Cc: John A Meinel <john@arbash-meinel.com>,
        "John S. Yates, Jr." <jyates@netezza.com>, gnu-arch-users@gnu.org
Subject: Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Re: release goals for Bazaar 1.1
References: <20041211183809.GC3388@wisq.net>	<873byasd73.fsf@tleepslib.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>	<cpk7vo$gu8$1@sea.gmane.org> <41BDADF5.5070507@arbash-meinel.com> <20041213201950.GA22540@ukato>
In-Reply-To: <20041213201950.GA22540@ukato>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Status: RO
Content-Length: 2753
Lines: 74
Couple of suggestions about features related to "blame" discussed in 
this thread.

There is one nice feature in viewarch, which I find using more often 
than "blame". In ViewArch, it is called "chrono".

While "blame" simulates "CVS annotate" and displays the last patch, and 
the id of the committer, "chrono" displays all possible variations of 
the line, with patch numbers beside.

Also, ViewArch has another nice feature, "i-history". Id displays all 
the list of patches which modified a specific file. Unlike "blame" and 
"chrono", it does go across branch boundary (before base-0 if the branch 
is a continuation). It is slow, but occasionally it really does help.

Milan.

Mikhael Goikhman wrote:
> On 13 Dec 2004 08:57:57 -0600, John A Meinel wrote:
> 
>>John S. Yates, Jr. wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"Stephen J. Turnbull" <stephen@xemacs.org> wrote in message
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>>>>"Adrian" == Adrian Irving-Beer <wisq-archlist@wisq.net> writes:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>That may be.  "Annotate" doesn't say at all what the command does,
>>>>though, except in a very generic way.  I'm probably just mentally
>>>>blocked, but at the moment I can't come up with an idiom that has the
>>>>same semantics as "blame" without the connotations: "finger",
>>>>"arrest", "accuse", ... ah, got it: "credit", or "colophon" ;-).
>>>
>>>Ascribe?
>>
>>After reading the SVN thread, there are a few that were interesting
>>etiology   The study of how things come about, (like how did a word come 
>>to usage). Pretty much exactly what we are doing, but not very obvious
>>linehistory   again, rather close to what we are doing, "can be 
>>shortened to lh" for shorter typing
>>praise      going the opposite way from blame
>>commentary   Doesn't quite fit for me
>>whodunit   Another silly one, but better than blame
>>
>>My personal favorites are linehistory, and whodunit
> 
> 
> Some of the names suggested above slightly describe the discussed command
> (linehistory, colophon, commentary), but may be confused with a different
> functionality, and other names simply do not describe the command.
> For some reason folks suppose the purpose of the command is to show the
> creator of each line, however the real purpose is to show the [last]
> revision description, i.e. fully qualified name, date, creator, summary.
> The creator may be (and is often) constant among revision descriptions.
> 
> "linedesc" would be more accurate. However, "annotate" sounds even better
> to me, and is familar to cvs users.
> 
> Regards,
> Mikhael.
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Gnu-arch-users mailing list
> Gnu-arch-users@gnu.org
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-arch-users
> 
> GNU arch home page:
> http://savannah.gnu.org/projects/gnu-arch/
>