On Fri, 2006-06-23 at 19:44 +0200, Marco Costalba wrote: > Or just "commands"? in any case I agree "macro" was not a good choice. For a menubar entry, something short is preferred, so "Commands" or "Actions" would be better than "external commands". Emacs calls it "Tools". But for a menu entry and the dialog title, "external commands" would be better. > The bug is qgit lets you write the first foo bar, before you press NEW > button. It shouldn't. Also some buttons enable/disable policy could be > good. Definitely. > > What happens to the arguments qgit is asking for if a multiline entry is > > executed? I understand they are prepended to the first line. This is > > not quite logical. Wouldn't it be better to have a shell like notation > > for them? I meant appended, sorry. > I thought of commands sequence as a quick way to run some simple > commands as git pull, git push or similar without writing a bash > script, i.e. no $1 for arguments. If you need something more complex > the external script is supposed to be the proper way. I think the checkbox controlling whether to ask for arguments allows selection between "simple" and "complex" commands. > Perhaps we could remove the external script single edit line and use > only the multiline edit to let user insert commands or script. I agree. > > I see the macros are saved in the qgit configuration for the > > user .qt/qgitrc, like this: > Well, this file is really not meant to be view nor to be modified by > hand, it is mainly a qgit 'private' thing stuff. Being qgit a GUI tool > with a (nice ;-) ) settings dialog, configuration file is mainly used > for persistency, not for browsing/setup. OK > I hope to fix the external commands interface bugs this week-end. I'm looking forward to testing it. -- Regards, Pavel Roskin - : send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html