[nama] Re: Git ready

  • From: "S. Massy" <lists@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: nama@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2012 17:32:54 -0400

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.

Other related posts: