issue designation

[Ivan Glushkov]

Hi.
I've found that we differently designate issue in commands:

act - ISSUENUM
cat - ISSUEID
commit - ID
remove - ID

I suppose we should choose one variant and use it everywhere.

Your proposals?
Mine is ISSUEID

Ivan.

[David Wolever]

Post by Ivan Glushkov
Your proposals?
Mine is ISSUEID

I'd prefer ID because my eyes aren't used to seeing ISSUEID, so it
takes a second to figure out what it is, while I see ID quite often,
so it's fairly simple to pattern match.

Whatever it is, though, one standardized thing is better than three
different things.

David

[Ivan Glushkov]

Post by Ivan Glushkov
Your proposals?
Mine is ISSUEID

I'd prefer ID because my eyes aren't used to seeing ISSUEID, so it takes a
second to figure out what it is, while I see ID quite often, so it's fairly
simple to pattern match.
Whatever it is, though, one standardized thing is better than three
different things.
David

too many letters? :)
i agree.
Vlad, your opinion?

Ivan.

[Vlad Skvortsov]

Post by Ivan Glushkov
Hi.
act - ISSUENUM
cat - ISSUEID
commit - ID
remove - ID
I suppose we should choose one variant and use it everywhere.

There are subtle differences between IDs and NUM's, see

https://svn.xiolabs.com/ditrack/doc/design.txt

(section 1.2)

Post by Ivan Glushkov
Your proposals?
Mine is ISSUEID

'act' only deals with firm issues, hence ISSUENUM.
'cat' is able to print out any type of entities (firm/local,
issues/comments), so it should be ID.
'commit' deals with local entities (issues/comments), thus, maybe
LOCALID/LID?
'remove' deals with local comments only -- hmm, COMMENTLID?

It gets complicated :-) We need to come up with something sensible :-)