From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.176.0/21 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.4 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED, DKIM_SIGNED,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MSGID_FROM_MTA_HEADER,RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 From: Andy Parkins Subject: Re: What's in git.git (stable) Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2006 10:21:11 +0000 Message-ID: <200612141021.12637.andyparkins@gmail.com> References: <7v4przfpir.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <200612132237.10051.andyparkins@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2006 10:21:24 +0000 (UTC) Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:from:to:subject:date:user-agent:references:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:message-id; b=akUw+WD8S7NXf/Ib7MuDUFDGLERAXtjIn8K6F/s0o1pz+f4IiRlSqqCxaStViNwHdgHB5y7R++gpVfI/SfOK6JKWBnHOAbFPfbWCg2HizKnk8Eh3GnXtmDK00HjfkxAZHM4f6QtNr4ybnvEL1X92ytyj7+NPtZzHJ5ZN5uj5cOI= User-Agent: KMail/1.9.5 In-Reply-To: Content-Disposition: inline Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by dough.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1GuniM-0005HN-B4 for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Thu, 14 Dec 2006 11:21:22 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751846AbWLNKVS (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Dec 2006 05:21:18 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751848AbWLNKVS (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Dec 2006 05:21:18 -0500 Received: from ug-out-1314.google.com ([66.249.92.175]:53359 "EHLO ug-out-1314.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751846AbWLNKVR (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Dec 2006 05:21:17 -0500 Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id 44so450216uga for ; Thu, 14 Dec 2006 02:21:16 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.66.219.11 with SMTP id r11mr1142230ugg.1166091676383; Thu, 14 Dec 2006 02:21:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from dvr.360vision.com ( [194.70.53.227]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id j33sm1843470ugc.2006.12.14.02.21.15; Thu, 14 Dec 2006 02:21:15 -0800 (PST) To: git@vger.kernel.org Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org On Thursday 2006 December 14 00:22, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > > * git-revert should be called git-invert. It doesn't remove a change > > from history, it simply applies another commit that does the > > opposite of whatever commit you are "revert"ing. That's an inversion. > > No. An inversion is the _opposite_. Not an undo. That's what I'm saying, we are applying the opposite of the given commit - that commit is being inverted and applied again. It most certainly isn't an undo, because the original commit still exists. It's not a reversion because "reversion" is to regress to a previous time or state. In that sense git-revert is not doing what it says on the tin. A revert would be to remove all the revisions from now until the specified commit - i.e. what git-reset now does. (Note: I don't think git-reset should be renamed, as it's possible to use git-reset to move a branch forward as well as backward). > Besides, The fact that revert _adds_ to history is a nice way to > document that you reverted that change. And you can even explain in the > commit message, why you did it. I'm not disputing that the /operation/ is useful, I'm arguing that it is incorrectly named. > IMHO it is better for a newbie to see that _something_ is happening. A I'm not arguing that we should show nothing; I'm arguing that the something we do show should be more clear than what is now shown. The choice is therefore "show something confusing" or "show something clear". > newbie cannot, and does not want to, understand exactly what is going on. "newbie" doesn't mean "idiot". Everybody wants to understand what is going on. > So, think of it as our response to Windows' non-progress-bar: when you > start up Windows, there is a progress-bar, except that it does not show > progress, but a Knight Rider like movement, only indicating that it does > something. Given the choice between nothing and a non-progress "doing something" bar, I would of course pick the "doing something" bar. However, given the choice between a "doing something" bar and a progress bar, I'd rather have the progress bar. Andy -- Dr Andy Parkins, M Eng (hons), MIEE