| 2006-03-18 22:00:23 |
Mark Shuttleworth |
description |
Added file group and the unknown file group were next to one another in the listing, then adding a previously-unknown file would give a more natural feeling to the eye. Imagine you type "bzr status" and see an unknown file. Then you "bzr add" that file, and type "bzr status" again. At the moment, the file jumps right to the top of the listing, into the added files group.
I think it would be less jarring for the added files to be listed just above the unknown files. That way you would look for the file in the same place, then see that it has moved just a little bit.
A very very minor nit, but I thought I would file a bug in any event. Has the sequence of groups in the status listing been discussed in detail, is there a published rationale for the current sequence? |
If the "added" file group and the "unknown" file group were next to one another in the listing, then adding a previously-unknown file would give a more natural feeling to the eye. Imagine you type "bzr status" and see an unknown file. Then you "bzr add" that file, and type "bzr status" again. At the moment, the file jumps right to the top of the listing, into the added files group.
I think it would be less jarring for the added files to be listed just above the unknown files. That way you would look for the file in the same place, then see that it has moved just a little bit.
A very very minor nit, but I thought I would file a bug in any event. Has the sequence of groups in the status listing been discussed in detail, is there a published rationale for the current sequence? |
|
