`mergiraf solve`: rename `--keep` to `--stdout` #263

New issue

Closed

opened 2025-03-18 16:25:42 +01:00 by ada4a · 3 comments

ada4a commented

2025-03-18 16:25:42 +01:00

Owner

The functionality of --keep is usually called --dry-run in other CLI tools. So I was looking for the latter, and only found the former after a longer-than-necessary search. Therefore, I'd propose we rename the flag.

We could still keep the old name as an alias, which clap allows

The functionality of `--keep` is usually called `--dry-run` in other CLI tools. So I was looking for the latter, and only found the former after a longer-than-necessary search. Therefore, I'd propose we rename the flag. We could still keep the old name as an alias, which clap [allows](https://docs.rs/clap/latest/clap/struct.Command.html#method.visible_alias)

ada4a changed title from ~~Rename mergiraf solve --keep to --dry-run?~~ to mergiraf solve: rename --keep to --dry-run?

2025-03-18 18:23:54 +01:00

wetneb commented

2025-03-18 19:39:47 +01:00

Owner

Why not! It's definitely confusing that we have --keep and --keep-backup, they are too similar.
To me --dry-run doesn't feel 100% right because that sounds to me as if the tool would just do the planning of the resolution without carrying it out - but it actually does do the entire computation and just outputs it somewhere else. To me --stdout would perhaps feel more natural… But I'm also happy with --dry-run.

Why not! It's definitely confusing that we have `--keep` and `--keep-backup`, they are too similar. To me `--dry-run` doesn't feel 100% right because that sounds to me as if the tool would just do the planning of the resolution without carrying it out - but it actually does do the entire computation and just outputs it somewhere else. To me `--stdout` would perhaps feel more natural… But I'm also happy with `--dry-run`.

ada4a commented

2025-03-18 19:44:39 +01:00

Author

Owner

To me --dry-run doesn't feel 100% right because that sounds to me as if the tool would just do the planning of the resolution without carrying it out - but it actually does do the entire computation and just outputs it somewhere else

Fair point!

To me --stdout would perhaps feel more natural…

Yeah, that does seem to be the better option. Git uses -p as the corresponding short flag, so we could incorporate that as well

> To me --dry-run doesn't feel 100% right because that sounds to me as if the tool would just do the planning of the resolution without carrying it out - but it actually does do the entire computation and just outputs it somewhere else Fair point! > To me --stdout would perhaps feel more natural… Yeah, that does seem to be the better option. Git uses `-p` as the corresponding short flag, so we could incorporate that as well

ada4a commented

2025-03-18 19:51:32 +01:00

Author

Owner

Speaking of Git's conventions, they actually use --marker-size instead of --conflict-marker-size (in git-merge-file at least) -- it might make sense to follow their example there as well

Speaking of Git's conventions, they actually use `--marker-size` instead of `--conflict-marker-size` (in [`git-merge-file`](https://git-scm.com/docs/git-merge-file) at least) -- it might make sense to follow their example there as well