From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: Tool renames? was Re: First stab at glossary Date: Sat, 03 Sep 2005 01:29:40 -0700 Message-ID: <7vy86e5zbf.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> References: <430C8C31.1070902@progeny.com> <7v4q9eak9k.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <43174090.5070503@progeny.com> <7vek88tib4.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <7voe7bfhfz.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <7v8xyebs9v.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Tim Ottinger , git@vger.kernel.org, Horst von Brand X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sat Sep 03 10:30:20 2005 Return-path: Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EBTPF-0006uw-7u for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Sat, 03 Sep 2005 10:29:45 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1161191AbVICI3m (ORCPT ); Sat, 3 Sep 2005 04:29:42 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1161192AbVICI3m (ORCPT ); Sat, 3 Sep 2005 04:29:42 -0400 Received: from fed1rmmtao12.cox.net ([68.230.241.27]:9968 "EHLO fed1rmmtao12.cox.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1161191AbVICI3m (ORCPT ); Sat, 3 Sep 2005 04:29:42 -0400 Received: from assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net ([68.4.9.127]) by fed1rmmtao12.cox.net (InterMail vM.6.01.05.02 201-2131-123-102-20050715) with ESMTP id <20050903082940.CAHD11315.fed1rmmtao12.cox.net@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>; Sat, 3 Sep 2005 04:29:40 -0400 To: Daniel Barkalow In-Reply-To: (Daniel Barkalow's message of "Sat, 3 Sep 2005 02:54:58 -0400 (EDT)") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110004 (No Gnus v0.4) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Daniel Barkalow writes: > Agreed, except that git-convert-cache and git-fsck-cache actually have > nothing to do this the index by any name, and should probably be > git-convert-objects and git-fsck-objects. You are right. > I think "fetch" is more applicable to what they do. OK. then they are git-http-fetch and friends. How about git-ssh-push? The counterpart of fetch-pack/clone-pack is called upload-pack, so would git-ssh-upload make things more consistent? I dunno. > I don't think it matters very much whether something is a script or not; > on the other hand, it would be good to have "git" list a reasonable set of > commands to use through the interface, which would exclude, for example, > git-merge-one-file-script, and include the above commands. Are you suggesting to drop -script from git-merge-one-file? Then git-cherry should perhaps keep its current name.