Talk:CLI Reference

should we add that Csend will add make it's own message to the recipient if it is not given?--Icon315 21:47, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

That's the kind of detail that should go on it's own page if the command is important enough to get its own page. --Bale 01:03, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

I agree with Bale. My thoughts so far on CLI commands;

• Obvious stuff that anyone can figure out by looking at this table doesn't warrant it's own page.
• Stuff that behaves exactly the same as an ASH command should probably say so and link to the function page
  • If it isn't exactly the same, but close enough that a line or two of explanation will clarify the difference, still link to the function but edit the function's CLI section to explain the difference.
  • Said functions don't need their own pages
• Stuff that has a similar or identically named ASH function, but behaves significantly differently on the CLI, should have it's own page (with the command as a link).
  • If the command names are the same, the cli command should be "command (CLI)" (ie "eat (CLI)", if eat needed its own page)
  • If the command has no ASH function with the same name, the "(CLI)" part can be omitted (we can always move a page later if an ASH equiv. is added)
• Create page names with alphanumeric characters when at all possible. Ie don't use "!" but rather "bang"

All additional thoughts on this are welcome. --StDoodle (#1059825) 03:17, 22 April 2010 (UTC)