From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.1 (2015-04-28) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.9 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.1 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id C78A61F453 for ; Thu, 25 Oct 2018 05:21:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727000AbeJYNwd (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Oct 2018 09:52:33 -0400 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([104.130.231.41]:53772 "HELO cloud.peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1726633AbeJYNwd (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Oct 2018 09:52:33 -0400 Received: (qmail 22291 invoked by uid 109); 25 Oct 2018 05:21:30 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.2) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with SMTP; Thu, 25 Oct 2018 05:21:30 +0000 Authentication-Results: cloud.peff.net; auth=none Received: (qmail 13547 invoked by uid 111); 25 Oct 2018 05:20:43 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with (ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) SMTP; Thu, 25 Oct 2018 01:20:43 -0400 Authentication-Results: peff.net; auth=none Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Thu, 25 Oct 2018 01:21:27 -0400 Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2018 01:21:27 -0400 From: Jeff King To: David Aguilar Cc: Junio C Hamano , Christian Couder , git , git@sfconservancy.org Subject: Re: Git trademark status and policy Message-ID: <20181025052127.GA11460@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <20170202022655.2jwvudhvo4hmueaw@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20180916101520.GC18517@gmail.com> <20180917032101.GD22024@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20180918182222.GA24448@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20181024075533.GA11043@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20181024075533.GA11043@gmail.com> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 12:55:33AM -0700, David Aguilar wrote: > > So I think we should generally recommend against such generic names > > during the naming phase. At this point, I'm not sure the pain of > > changing now is any less than the pain of changing later if and when > > there's a conflict. > [...] > > Thanks for the recommendation. I'm open to changing the name in a > future major release. For users that already use the short "dag" name, > we can transition over to something else if it's relatively short and > sweet. Going from my paragraph above, I think it is probably OK to just leave it for now (unless you prefer to use a major version boundary to do the change rather than later possibly having to deal with it on a shorter timeframe). I have no real opinion on a replacement name. :) > There's also one more script, but it's never installed in the users's > $PATH and is more of an internal implementation detail. Git Cola > includes a GIT_SEQUENCE_EDITOR-compatible "git-xbase" command that > provides a visual interactive rebase feature. That command should > probably be renamed to "cola-git-seq-editor" to make that clearer, and > also to open up the possibility of installing it in bin/ in the future > since it is useful on its own. Yeah, agreed. If it's not in the PATH, then it doesn't need to be git-* at all, does it? > The rationale for two commands is that worktree diff+commit and history > inspection are our two primary use-cases. Everything else is provided > as a sub-command, "git cola rebase", "git cola stash", etc. so there's > not much pressure to add more top-level names, just these two. Makes sense. > Thoughts? Everything you said seems pretty reasonable to me. Thanks for being conscientious about the naming issues. -Peff