Why you don't want to allow disabling "branches are global and permanent, did you want a bookmark"?

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
40 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Why you don't want to allow disabling "branches are global and permanent, did you want a bookmark"?

vitalif
Hello!

As I've already mentioned (several times :-D) in Bug 3321
(http://bz.selenic.com/show_bug.cgi?id=3321), the "branches are global
and permanent, did you want a bookmark?" message is VERY annoying,
especially when you like mercurial branches and dislike git ones.

What's the problem with implementing a simple configuration option like

[ui]
i_love_permanent_branches = true

?

This option won't hurt anyone who complains on hg not having git
branches, it will just do a good job for users like me, which don't want
bookmarks at all.

So why not implement it?

It's like Tips and Tricks dialog, which ALWAYS has "Don't show this
again" checkbox.
I think you would be unhappy if you couldn't disable it - maybe there
is something interesting, but it's very annoying to see it every time!
This message is similar, and there should be an option to disable it
without patching mercurial code or using 3rdparty extensions.

_______________________________________________
Mercurial-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://selenic.com/mailman/listinfo/mercurial-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Why you don't want to allow disabling "branches are global and permanent, did you want a bookmark"?"

Nikolaj Sjujskij
Den 2012-08-08 11:49:48 skrev <[hidden email]>:

> Hello!
>
> As I've already mentioned (several times :-D) in Bug 3321  
> (http://bz.selenic.com/show_bug.cgi?id=3321), the "branches are global  
> and permanent, did you want a bookmark?" message is VERY annoying,  
> especially when you like mercurial branches and dislike git ones.
>
> What's the problem with implementing a simple configuration option like
>
> [ui]
> i_love_permanent_branches = true
>
> ?
>
> This option won't hurt anyone who complains on hg not having git  
> branches, it will just do a good job for users like me, which don't want  
> bookmarks at all.
>
> So why not implement it?
>
> It's like Tips and Tricks dialog, which ALWAYS has "Don't show this  
> again" checkbox.
> I think you would be unhappy if you couldn't disable it - maybe there is  
> something interesting, but it's very annoying to see it every time!
> This message is similar, and there should be an option to disable it  
> without patching mercurial code or using 3rdparty extensions.
  I'd also like to get rid of this message, if possible.
_______________________________________________
Mercurial-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://selenic.com/mailman/listinfo/mercurial-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Why you don't want to allow disabling "branches are global and permanent, did you want a bookmark"?

Laurens Holst
In reply to this post by vitalif
Op 08-08-12 09:49, [hidden email] schreef:

> Hello!
>
> As I've already mentioned (several times :-D) in Bug 3321
> (http://bz.selenic.com/show_bug.cgi?id=3321), the "branches are global
> and permanent, did you want a bookmark?" message is VERY annoying,
> especially when you like mercurial branches and dislike git ones.
>
> What's the problem with implementing a simple configuration option like
>
> [ui]
> i_love_permanent_branches = true

Because if you’d solve every disagreement on a UX choice with a
configuration option you’d soon be drowning in them.

Adding the option means it needs to be documented and supported, so
there is development and maintenance overhead involved for those who do
not care for it. Solve UX disagreements this way a 100 times, and you’ve
got a significant maintenance burden, and a massive hgrc documentation
filled with insignificant UI tweaks.

By now you’ve written 8 bug comments involving several core developers,
and are now writing to the mailing list even though it has already been
rejected. Why not direct the energy you spend on this towards something
positive. Like writing an extension to filter the output to your liking.
Share it with others and if it turns out to be popular, hey, the devs
might change their mind. But don’t expect others to solve your problem
for you when they disagree with it.

And to put things in perspective: it’s a single stupid notification
message, you could just ignore it.

~Laurens

_______________________________________________
Mercurial-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://selenic.com/mailman/listinfo/mercurial-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Why you don't want to allow disabling "branches are global and permanent, did you want a bookmark"?

harry
I humbly suggest that this is objectively bad UI design, not just a matter of personal preference. Asking "do you want to do something else instead?" every time a branch is created implies a deprecated feature or one which should rarely be used, not just warning the user about a common misunderstanding.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Why you don't want to allow disabling "branches are global and permanent, did you want a bookmark"?

harry
v wrote
I humbly suggest that this is objectively bad UI design, not just a matter of personal preference. Asking "do you want to do something else instead?" every time a branch is created implies a deprecated feature or one which should rarely be used, not just warning the user about a common misunderstanding.
And as vitalif pointed out, the ubiquitous UI convention is that warnings can be disabled after they're shown for the first time. Perhaps the wording should be softer, and only shown when the first named branch is created.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Why you don't want to allow disabling "branches are global and permanent, did you want a bookmark"?

Mads Kiilerich
In reply to this post by harry
On 08/08/12 13:10, v wrote:
> I humbly suggest that this is objectively bad UI design, not just a matter of
> personal preference. Asking "do you want to do something else instead?"
> every time a branch is created implies a deprecated feature or one which
> should rarely be used, not just warning the user about a common
> misunderstanding.

The root cause of the "problem" is that git started using the name
"branch" for something that was temporary. Many new Mercurial users thus
have wrong expectations when they start using Mercurial. This message is
an attempt at mitigating one of the first and major issue these users
have with Mercurial.

Nobody denied that the message could be improved. This is the -devel
list - please try to contribute a convincing a patch.

We want to keep a message that will educate new users that come with
wrong expectations ... but it would be nice if the message acknowledged
the sane use cases for 'branch' and didn't hint so strongly that the
user was wrong.

> And as vitalif pointed out, the ubiquitous UI convention is that warnings
> can be disabled after they're shown for the first time. Perhaps the wording
> should be softer, and only shown when the first named branch is created.

If that is a convention then it is not a convention that applies here.
Mercurial intentionally try to behave exactly the same way everywhere
and has as few configuration options as possible.

A "say-this-only-once---ever" extension should however not be hard to write.

/Mads

_______________________________________________
Mercurial-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://selenic.com/mailman/listinfo/mercurial-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Why you don't want to allow disabling "branches are global and permanent, did you want a bookmark"?

Adrian Buehlmann
On 2012-08-08 13:35, Mads Kiilerich wrote:
> On 08/08/12 13:10, v wrote:
>> I humbly suggest that this is objectively bad UI design, not just a matter of
>> personal preference. Asking "do you want to do something else instead?"
>> every time a branch is created implies a deprecated feature or one which
>> should rarely be used, not just warning the user about a common
>> misunderstanding.

I concur.

> The root cause of the "problem" is that git started using the name
> "branch" for something that was temporary. Many new Mercurial users thus
> have wrong expectations when they start using Mercurial. This message is
> an attempt at mitigating one of the first and major issue these users
> have with Mercurial.
>
> Nobody denied that the message could be improved. This is the -devel
> list - please try to contribute a convincing a patch.

My patch would be to remove that warning. But that's not what you want,
obviously.

If git users have a problem with Mercurial, then someone who wants to
help them may write an extension, if they want such a message.

Annoying the Mercurial users who know what a Mercurial branch is with
such a message is indeed pretty silly.
_______________________________________________
Mercurial-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://selenic.com/mailman/listinfo/mercurial-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Why you don't want to allow disabling "branches are global and permanent, did you want a bookmark"?

Matt Mackall
In reply to this post by vitalif
On Wed, 2012-08-08 at 11:49 +0400, [hidden email] wrote:
> Hello!
>
> As I've already mentioned (several times :-D) in Bug 3321
> (http://bz.selenic.com/show_bug.cgi?id=3321),

Indeed you have, and you got a number of definitive responses there. Why
should I even read this thread when it seems its point is simply to try
to gather popular support for a solution that I've already rejected? If
I were the type of project leader who accepted solutions I didn't like
just because they were popular.. we'd all be using Git.

If you want to make forward progress, suggest a solution that hasn't
been definitively rejected. For instance, I don't know.. how about
automatically suppressing the message in repos that already have 10
branches? That's probably sufficiently n00b-proof, while getting out of
the way of heavy branch users.

--
Mathematics is the supreme nostalgia of our time.


_______________________________________________
Mercurial-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://selenic.com/mailman/listinfo/mercurial-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Why you don't want to allow disabling "branches are global and permanent, did you want a bookmark"?

Adrian Buehlmann
On 2012-08-08 18:44, Matt Mackall wrote:

> On Wed, 2012-08-08 at 11:49 +0400, [hidden email] wrote:
>> Hello!
>>
>> As I've already mentioned (several times :-D) in Bug 3321
>> (http://bz.selenic.com/show_bug.cgi?id=3321),
>
> Indeed you have, and you got a number of definitive responses there. Why
> should I even read this thread when it seems its point is simply to try
> to gather popular support for a solution that I've already rejected? If
> I were the type of project leader who accepted solutions I didn't like
> just because they were popular.. we'd all be using Git.
>
> If you want to make forward progress, suggest a solution that hasn't
> been definitively rejected. For instance, I don't know.. how about
> automatically suppressing the message in repos that already have 10
> branches? That's probably sufficiently n00b-proof, while getting out of
> the way of heavy branch users.

How about:

diff --git a/mercurial/commands.py b/mercurial/commands.py
--- a/mercurial/commands.py
+++ b/mercurial/commands.py
@@ -912,8 +912,8 @@
                                      hint=_("use 'hg update' to switch to it"))
             repo.dirstate.setbranch(label)
             ui.status(_('marked working directory as branch %s\n') % label)
-            ui.status(_('(branches are permanent and global, '
-                        'did you want a bookmark?)\n'))
+            ui.status(_('(the branch name will be permanently recorded '
+                        'on commit)\n'))
     finally:
         wlock.release()

Which looks like this:

  $ hg branch foo
  marked working directory as branch foo
  (the branch name will be permanently recorded on commit)

Instead of (currently):

  $ hg branch foo
  marked working directory as branch foo
  (branches are permanent and global, did you want a bookmark?)

_______________________________________________
Mercurial-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://selenic.com/mailman/listinfo/mercurial-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Why you don't want to allow disabling "branches are global and permanent, did you want a bookmark"?

paul_nathan
In reply to this post by Mads Kiilerich
[hidden email] wrote on 08/08/2012 04:35:34 AM:

> From: Mads Kiilerich <[hidden email]>

> To: v <[hidden email]>,
> Cc: [hidden email]
> Date: 08/08/2012 04:35 AM
> Subject: Re: Why you don't want to allow disabling "branches are
> global and permanent, did you want a bookmark"?

> Sent by: [hidden email]
>
> On 08/08/12 13:10, v wrote:
> > I humbly suggest that this is objectively bad UI design, not just
> a matter of
> > personal preference. Asking "do you want to do something else instead?"
> > every time a branch is created implies a deprecated feature or one which
> > should rarely be used, not just warning the user about a common
> > misunderstanding.
>
> The root cause of the "problem" is that git started using the name
> "branch" for something that was temporary. Many new Mercurial users thus
> have wrong expectations when they start using Mercurial. This message is
> an attempt at mitigating one of the first and major issue these users
> have with Mercurial.
>
> Nobody denied that the message could be improved. This is the -devel
> list - please try to contribute a convincing a patch.
>
> We want to keep a message that will educate new users that come with
> wrong expectations ... but it would be nice if the message acknowledged
> the sane use cases for 'branch' and didn't hint so strongly that the
> user was wrong.

Dear -devel-

It's very confusing for a certain segment of users. The usual line of thought
seems to roll like this "Oh, a warning message! I did something wrong! PANIC!"


This is the same group of users who will occasionally blithely ignore messages:
"A error box! Click the OK and let's get back to work".

As someone who provides information & training to users, I am put on the spot
when the Mercurial project makes a UI decision.   Since our company uses named
branches extensively - after careful thought - this particular message is troublesome
from a support and training perspective.

Having to train people to ignore *some* warnings but not *other* warnings is a pain,
and further, adds error. "Q: You said to ignore this error. A: No, I said to ignore the
other warning!" Not a dialogue I want to engage in.


I would FAR rather see this line entirely removed. If that is unswallowable, a message that
doesn't imply the user is doing something wrong would be better.  It is also useless
to an experienced hg developer who knows what they are doing - "Yes, I know I want a branch,
please shut up, hg"



Argument from authority:
Rule of Silence: "When a program has nothing surprising to say, it should say nothing."

I would argue that the creation of a hg branch is the unsurprising result when you issue

hg branch foo-bar


Like Adrian mentioned, *my* patch would be to strip the message. I've contemplated doing just
that for my dev box install.

regards,
Paul
_______________________________________________
Mercurial-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://selenic.com/mailman/listinfo/mercurial-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Why you don't want to allow disabling "branches are global and permanent, did you want a bookmark"?

Nikolaj Sjujskij
Den 2012-08-08 23:51:21 skrev <[hidden email]>:

> [hidden email] wrote on 08/08/2012 04:35:34 AM:
>
>> From: Mads Kiilerich <[hidden email]>
>> To: v <[hidden email]>,
>> Cc: [hidden email]
>> Date: 08/08/2012 04:35 AM
>> Subject: Re: Why you don't want to allow disabling "branches are
>> global and permanent, did you want a bookmark"?
>> Sent by: [hidden email]
>>
>> On 08/08/12 13:10, v wrote:
>> > I humbly suggest that this is objectively bad UI design, not just
>> a matter of
>> > personal preference. Asking "do you want to do something else
> instead?"
>> > every time a branch is created implies a deprecated feature or one
> which
>> > should rarely be used, not just warning the user about a common
>> > misunderstanding.
>>
>> The root cause of the "problem" is that git started using the name
>> "branch" for something that was temporary. Many new Mercurial users thus
>
>> have wrong expectations when they start using Mercurial. This message is
>
>> an attempt at mitigating one of the first and major issue these users
>> have with Mercurial.
>>
>> Nobody denied that the message could be improved. This is the -devel
>> list - please try to contribute a convincing a patch.
>>
>> We want to keep a message that will educate new users that come with
>> wrong expectations ... but it would be nice if the message acknowledged
>> the sane use cases for 'branch' and didn't hint so strongly that the
>> user was wrong.
>
> Dear -devel-
>
> It's very confusing for a certain segment of users. The usual line of
> thought seems to roll like this "Oh, a warning message! I did
> something wrong! PANIC!"
  ...and current situation contradicts with principle "Old users are more  
valuable than new ones". For every careless git user who is too lazy to  
read documentation and is reminded by this message we probably have  
hundreds of terminal lines wasted, dozens of expirienced users irritated  
and tens of newbies who read, say, hgbook, and try their first `hg branch`  
to be confused by suggestion to use bookmarks.
_______________________________________________
Mercurial-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://selenic.com/mailman/listinfo/mercurial-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Why you don't want to allow disabling "branches are global and permanent, did you want a bookmark"?

Laurens Holst
In reply to this post by paul_nathan
Op 08-08-12 21:51, [hidden email] schreef:
I would FAR rather see this line entirely removed.

Definitively rejected, so why bring it up *again*?

If that is unswallowable, a message that
doesn't imply the user is doing something wrong would be better.

So where are your concrete suggestions? Or do you expect someone else to do that for you?

~Laurens


_______________________________________________
Mercurial-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://selenic.com/mailman/listinfo/mercurial-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Why you don't want to allow disabling "branches are global and permanent, did you want a bookmark"?

harry
Laurens Holst wrote
> If that is unswallowable, a message that
> doesn't imply the user is doing something wrong would be better.

So where are your concrete suggestions? Or do you expect someone else to
do that for you?
How about: "The branch name will be permanently recorded on commit. For alternatives, see hg help bookmarks."

If the repository already has named branches, perhaps this hint should be omitted altogether.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Why you don't want to allow disabling "branches are global and permanent, did you want a bookmark"?

Adrian Buehlmann
In reply to this post by Laurens Holst
On 2012-08-09 10:43, Laurens Holst wrote:
> Op 08-08-12 21:51, [hidden email] schreef:
>> I would FAR rather see this line entirely removed.
>
> Definitively rejected, so why bring it up *again*?

Because it was a bad decision, for the reasons laid out by multiple
people in this thread here.

FWIW, I have only seen the config option definitely rejected (which I
agree with).

The config option is not needed, because there is no need for such a
warning at all.
_______________________________________________
Mercurial-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://selenic.com/mailman/listinfo/mercurial-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Why you don't want to allow disabling "branches are global and permanent, did you want a bookmark"?

Adrian Buehlmann
In reply to this post by harry
On 2012-08-09 10:59, v wrote:

>
> Laurens Holst wrote
>>
>>> If that is unswallowable, a message that
>>> doesn't imply the user is doing something wrong would be better.
>>
>> So where are your concrete suggestions? Or do you expect someone else to
>> do that for you?
>>
>
> How about: "The branch name will be permanently recorded on commit. For
> alternatives, see hg help bookmarks."

If Mercurial nowadays really has to start getting *that* chatty, that's
probably an acceptable compromise.

But I really wonder why we now even have to hint at other features
(bookmarks) in status messages of unrelated commands (branch).

Can't we expect that people would start looking around for alternatives
if they are told that the branch name will be permanent, likely noticing
that that perhaps is *not* what they expect? Perhaps this would then be
enough motivation for those poor git refugees to finally start reading
some help texts? (like for example "help branch", which already has a
prominent notice about bookmarks?)

> If the repository already has named branches, perhaps this hint should be
> omitted altogether.

Sounds too surprising to me, and a bit ridiculous (to reach for such
complex logic).

Either we can manage to make a reasonable choice, or let things be as
they are.
_______________________________________________
Mercurial-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://selenic.com/mailman/listinfo/mercurial-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Why you don't want to allow disabling "branches are global and permanent, did you want a bookmark"?

harry
Adrian Buehlmann wrote
On 2012-08-09 10:59, v wrote:
>
> Laurens Holst wrote
>>
>>> If that is unswallowable, a message that
>>> doesn't imply the user is doing something wrong would be better.
>>
>> So where are your concrete suggestions? Or do you expect someone else to
>> do that for you?
>>
>
> How about: "The branch name will be permanently recorded on commit. For
> alternatives, see hg help bookmarks."

If Mercurial nowadays really has to start getting *that* chatty, that's
probably an acceptable compromise.

But I really wonder why we now even have to hint at other features
(bookmarks) in status messages of unrelated commands (branch).

Can't we expect that people would start looking around for alternatives
if they are told that the branch name will be permanent, likely noticing
that that perhaps is *not* what they expect? Perhaps this would then be
enough motivation for those poor git refugees to finally start reading
some help texts? (like for example "help branch", which already has a
prominent notice about bookmarks?)
Perhaps that should be "The branch name will be permanently recorded on commit. For alternatives, see the help topic." I would prefer something more concise, but I couldn't think of anything with the right tone.

Adrian Buehlmann wrote
On 2012-08-09 10:59, v wrote:
> If the repository already has named branches, perhaps this hint should be
> omitted altogether.

Sounds too surprising to me, and a bit ridiculous (to reach for such complex logic).

Either we can manage to make a reasonable choice, or let things be as they are.
The user only needs to be warned once. As keeping a configuration option has been rejected, this seemed like a reasonable alternative.

If they ignored the first message, they'll probably ignore subsequent messages as well, and people who know what they're doing don't have to be bothered every time they create a branch!
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Why you don't want to allow disabling "branches are global and permanent, did you want a bookmark"?

Laurens Holst
Op 09-08-12 13:28, v schreef:

> Adrian Buehlmann wrote
>> On 2012-08-09 10:59, v wrote:
>>> How about: "The branch name will be permanently recorded on commit. For
>>> alternatives, see hg help bookmarks."
>> If Mercurial nowadays really has to start getting *that* chatty, that's
>> probably an acceptable compromise.
>>
>> But I really wonder why we now even have to hint at other features
>> (bookmarks) in status messages of unrelated commands (branch).
>>
>> Can't we expect that people would start looking around for alternatives
>> if they are told that the branch name will be permanent, likely noticing
>> that that perhaps is *not* what they expect? Perhaps this would then be
>> enough motivation for those poor git refugees to finally start reading
>> some help texts? (like for example "help branch", which already has a
>> prominent notice about bookmarks?)
> Perhaps that should be "The branch name will be permanently recorded on
> commit. For alternatives, see the help topic." I would prefer something more
> concise, but I couldn't think of anything with the right tone.

Afaik it’s a rather strict requirement that any message needs to fit on
an 80-character line.

~Laurens

_______________________________________________
Mercurial-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://selenic.com/mailman/listinfo/mercurial-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Why you don't want to allow disabling "branches are global and permanent, did you want a bookmark"?

Augie Fackler-2
In reply to this post by Adrian Buehlmann

On Aug 9, 2012, at 4:00 AM, Adrian Buehlmann wrote:

> On 2012-08-09 10:43, Laurens Holst wrote:
>> Op 08-08-12 21:51, [hidden email] schreef:
>>> I would FAR rather see this line entirely removed.
>>
>> Definitively rejected, so why bring it up *again*?
>
> Because it was a bad decision, for the reasons laid out by multiple
> people in this thread here.
>
> FWIW, I have only seen the config option definitely rejected (which I
> agree with).
>
> The config option is not needed, because there is no need for such a
> warning at all.

Nonsense. I can't count the number of users that have expressed hatred for Mercurial because it's branches aren't git branches, and then as soon as I show them bookmarks they are happy as can be. In my experience talking to users, the vast majority of users that look for branches really want bookmarks.

I agree though, it'd be nice if there was a way to only warn a few times before trusting the user to blow his own foot off. I'm actually a proponent of the config option, because I can't come up with a heuristic that we won't regret later.
_______________________________________________
Mercurial-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://selenic.com/mailman/listinfo/mercurial-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Why you don't want to allow disabling "branches are global and permanent, did you want a bookmark"?

Adrian Buehlmann
On 2012-08-09 15:35, Augie Fackler wrote:

>
> On Aug 9, 2012, at 4:00 AM, Adrian Buehlmann wrote:
>
>> On 2012-08-09 10:43, Laurens Holst wrote:
>>> Op 08-08-12 21:51, [hidden email] schreef:
>>>> I would FAR rather see this line entirely removed.
>>>
>>> Definitively rejected, so why bring it up *again*?
>>
>> Because it was a bad decision, for the reasons laid out by multiple
>> people in this thread here.
>>
>> FWIW, I have only seen the config option definitely rejected (which I
>> agree with).
>>
>> The config option is not needed, because there is no need for such a
>> warning at all.
>
> Nonsense. I can't count the number of users that have expressed hatred for Mercurial because it's branches aren't git branches, and then as soon as I show them bookmarks they are happy as can be. In my experience talking to users, the vast majority of users that look for branches really want bookmarks.

And how does that relate to what I wrote exactly?

You have a number of users who haven't yet discovered that Mercurial
isn't git. Great. So what?

You are now proposing that Mercurial should mention on every command
that Mercurial's branches aren't git branches or what?

> I agree though, it'd be nice if there was a way to only warn a few times before trusting the user to blow his own foot off. I'm actually a proponent of the config option, because I can't come up with a heuristic that we won't regret later.

Let's face it: users not wanting to read manuals (or not even the short
help texts of Mercurial) will *always* do silly things, no matter what
we do. That shouldn't be an excuse to annoy the current Mercurial
userbase. And, as you know, Mercurial's branches were there before the
advent of bookmarks.

The hint in the help of the branch command is really enough. There is no
need to treat users (who actually know what they do) like idiots every
time they use the branch command. Or confuse users who have just learned
what a Mercurial branch is with that notice about bookmarks.

Mercurial has a good tradition of showing "what's next" in the (..)
part. That's why I proposed to do:

  $ hg branch foo
  marked working directory as branch foo
  (the branch name will be permanently recorded on commit)

There's really no need to mention an unrelated concept (bookmarks) there.

We shouldn't start trying to make Mercurial look like git. There is no
need to do so. And we can't anyway.



_______________________________________________
Mercurial-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://selenic.com/mailman/listinfo/mercurial-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Why you don't want to allow disabling "branches are global and permanent, did you want a bookmark"?

Augie Fackler-2
On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 9:12 AM, Adrian Buehlmann <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 2012-08-09 15:35, Augie Fackler wrote:
>>
>> On Aug 9, 2012, at 4:00 AM, Adrian Buehlmann wrote:
>>
>>> On 2012-08-09 10:43, Laurens Holst wrote:
>>> The config option is not needed, because there is no need for such a
>>> warning at all.
>>
>> Nonsense. I can't count the number of users that have expressed hatred for Mercurial because it's branches aren't git branches, and then as soon as I show them bookmarks they are happy as can be. In my experience talking to users, the vast majority of users that look for branches really want bookmarks.
>
> And how does that relate to what I wrote exactly?
>
> You have a number of users who haven't yet discovered that Mercurial
> isn't git. Great. So what?

So they blame the tool for their own uninformed decisions, and we have
to work with that reality. I think the warning is a good thing as a
result.

[snip lots of explanation and general violent agreement]

> Mercurial has a good tradition of showing "what's next" in the (..)
> part. That's why I proposed to do:
>
>   $ hg branch foo
>   marked working directory as branch foo
>   (the branch name will be permanently recorded on commit)
>
> There's really no need to mention an unrelated concept (bookmarks) there.

Yes, there is: the (hypothetical git) user will get angry that the
branch is permanent, and decide Mercurial is a useless piece of trash
and never look back. I've had much better discussions with "recovering
git users" with this warning in place as-is.

>
> We shouldn't start trying to make Mercurial look like git. There is no
> need to do so. And we can't anyway.

Nobody's saying we should (well, I'm not). I just want to acknowledge
the world we live in and try and help users not get surprised.

>
>
>
_______________________________________________
Mercurial-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://selenic.com/mailman/listinfo/mercurial-devel
12