sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List
List archive
Re: [SM-Discuss] RFC: sorcery usabilty study results
- From: David Kowis <dkowis AT shlrm.org>
- To: sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
- Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] RFC: sorcery usabilty study results
- Date: Tue, 01 Apr 2008 20:31:34 +0000
Karsten Behrmann wrote:
So here is the sorted initial list of the shortcuts and what they woud run:
cc - cast --queue (who can spell queue anyway?)
cp - cleanse --prune
dd - dispel --downgrade
gs - gaze search
gv - gaze version
sg - sorcery upgrade
sh - sorcery hold
sq - sorcery -q
su - scribe update
Good idea, but that list desperately needs adding to.
ac - alter --md5mend ("Checksum" is far more futureproof than md5)
as - alter --strip
at - gaze activity
cd - cast --download
co - cast -c ("COmpile")
df - dispel --nosustain (every one knows it's "Force" anyway)
ex - dispel --exile
ls - gaze license
nc - cast -r ("New Config")
pr - gaze provides
ri - scribe reindex
wc - gaze what ("What will this Cast do?")
Lets take something we claim is confusing and make it more confusing!
This is a horrible idea. You don't increase the usability and clarity of something by making obscure shortcuts. Doing it in the style of git might be better for usability, or if we wanted to stay within a namespace. Personally I think we're doing pretty well.
I tend to agree with what sqweek has said. Refinement of our existing namespace to better define what things do.
David
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] RFC: sorcery usabilty study results,
Jaka Kranjc, 04/01/2008
- <Possible follow-up(s)>
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] RFC: sorcery usabilty study results,
sqweek, 04/01/2008
- Re: [SM-Discuss] RFC: sorcery usabilty study results, Ismael Luceno, 04/01/2008
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] RFC: sorcery usabilty study results,
Karsten Behrmann, 04/01/2008
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] RFC: sorcery usabilty study results,
David Kowis, 04/01/2008
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] RFC: sorcery usabilty study results,
Andraž 'ruskie' Levstik, 04/02/2008
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] RFC: sorcery usabilty study results,
Thomas Orgis, 04/02/2008
- Re: [SM-Discuss] RFC: sorcery usabilty study results, Robert Figura, 04/02/2008
- Re: [SM-Discuss] RFC: sorcery usabilty study results, David Kowis, 04/02/2008
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] RFC: sorcery usabilty study results,
eekee57, 04/02/2008
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] RFC: sorcery usabilty study results,
Jaka Kranjc, 04/02/2008
- Re: [SM-Discuss] RFC: sorcery usabilty study results, eekee57, 04/04/2008
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] RFC: sorcery usabilty study results,
Jaka Kranjc, 04/02/2008
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] RFC: sorcery usabilty study results,
Thomas Orgis, 04/02/2008
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] RFC: sorcery usabilty study results,
Andraž 'ruskie' Levstik, 04/02/2008
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] RFC: sorcery usabilty study results,
David Kowis, 04/01/2008
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.