Hello, Haven't been around much the past week, what with end-of-summer, my daughter getting started on school (makes me feel old), and a tonne of stuff besides... On Sat, Aug 25, 2012 at 05:52:00PM -1000, Joel Roth wrote: > Optimistic Namites! > > save_state in a development branch has new options That's absolutely grand: can't wait to pull and test this out! > > -t <s_tag_name> > -f <s_settings_file> > -m <s_message> > -b <s_branch_name> > > -t, -f and -b are exclusive > > -m provides a message for the commit or tag > > This is the first use of argument flags in the command Nama grammar. > > "save foo" is currently the same as "save -f foo". > Perhaps it should "git checkout foo; save" > if use_git is enabled. I have mixed feelings about using args on the save commands; it seems more nama_like to have commands such as project_tag, project_commit, project_branch, and so forth. Of course, these could be aliases to the main save commands. What do you all think? Saving to file should probably stay around, but I can't see it remaining very useful once git-integration is achieved. As far as I'm concerned, the intuitive behaviour for save would be a commit to the current branch with optional message. > > I believe you will have to call save manually > at the moment. > > Hmm, I didn't think about 'restore foo'. "foo" could > be a commit, a branch, a tag, or a filename! > > How about "restore -f foo" for a file, and "restore foo" > will look for a git object ? Yes, then one could do "restore HEAD" to go back to the latest commit. Thanks for your great work! Cheers, S.M.