Re: [PATCH v2] config: add '--sources' option to print the source of a config value
- From
Ramsay Jones <ramsay@ramsayjones.plus.com>
- Date
- Feb 10, 2016, 16:03 UTC
- Message-ID
- <56BB5F55.9040404@ramsayjones.plus.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <CAHGBnuNGTQvBStqK6-OERye4y2+yvRkK3g+rdSNPepSqy4kyRg@mail.gmail.com>
On 10/02/16 15:28, Sebastian Schuberth wrote:
Show 23 quoted lines
> On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 1:47 PM, Ramsay Jones > <ramsay@ramsayjones.plus.com> wrote: > >>> Sebastian suggested "--show-origin" as a better option name over "--sources". >>> I still believe "--sources" might be slightly better as I fear that users could >>> somehow related "origin" to "remote" kind of configs. However, I am happy to >>> change that if a majority prefers "--show-origin". >> >> <bikeshed> >> As I have said before, I'm not very good at naming things, but ... >> >> Of the two, I *slightly* prefer --show-origin, since I don't think >> there will be any confusion. However, I think --source may be OK too >> (for some reason it sounds better than the plural). Another idea >> may be --show-source. ;-) >> >> </bikeshed> > > I agree that using --source sounds better than --sources, as the > latter sounds even more like "source code". > > Here's another idea: How about --declaration or --show-declaration? >
Hmm, I think its more like a definition! :-D
[Sorry, I just couldn't resist. I promise not to say any more on this. ;-) ]
ATB, Ramsay Jones