From: "Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason" <avarab@gmail.com>
To: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
Cc: "Michael Muré" <batolettre@gmail.com>,
git@vger.kernel.org,
"Johannes Schindelin" <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>
Subject: Re: git-bug: Distributed bug tracker embedded in git
Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2018 23:53:50 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <8736vbqr2p.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180818204243.GA136983@aiede.svl.corp.google.com>
On Sat, Aug 18 2018, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
>> On Sat, Aug 18 2018, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
>>> Michael Muré wrote:
>
>>>> I released today git-bug, a distributed bug tracker
> [...]
>>> I am a bit unhappy about the namespace grab. Not for trademark
>>> reasons: the Git trademark rules are pretty clear about this kind of
>>> usage being okay. Instead, the unhappiness comes because a future Git
>>> command like "git bug" to produce a bug report with appropriate
>>> diagnostics for a bug in Git seems like a likely and useful thing to
>>> get added to Git some day. And now the name's taken.
>>>
>>> Is it too late to ask if it's possible to come up with a less generic
>>> name?
>>
>> Wouldn't we call such a thing "git-reportbug", or "git gitbug", with
>> reference to Debian reportbug or perl's perlbug?
>
> I hope you're kidding about "git gitbug".
It sounds a bit silly, but such a tool is going to be rarely used enough
that we probably don't want to squat a 3 letter command to invoke it.
> [...]
>> 1) Accept the status quo where people do create third party tools, much
>> of which are way too obscure to matter (e.g. I'm sure someone's
>> created a tool/alias called range-diff before, but we didn't
>> care).
>>
>> If those tools become popular enough in the wild they get own that
>> namespace, e.g. we're not going to ship a "git-annex" or "git-lfs"
>> ourselves implementing some unrelated features
>
> That's fair. Let me spell out my thinking a little more.
>
> This framework would lead me to rephrase my question to Michael a
> different way. Instead of saying that I'm not happy with the
> namespace grab, I should say something more severe:
>
> Don't be surprised if Git itself makes a "git bug" command in the
> future, and be prepared to rename.
>
> Is that preferable, in your opinion?
We're not going to make some blanket policy that doesn't recognize the
difference between say git-lfs and git-tool_nobody_has_ever_heard_of,
and then decide that it would be just as reasonable for us to ship a new
git-lfs ourselves (which would do something different) as it were for us
to ship git-tool_nobody_has_ever_heard_of.
The reason I can drop a "git-whatever" in my $PATH and invoke it as "git
whatever" is just a historical accident of how git was implemented.
But because that feature has been exposed since the very beginning it's
become an implicit API. There's thousands of git-whatever tools, and
people do use these. The likes of git-lfs and git-annex are used a *lot*
more than some builtins we ship.
So we don't get to say "you never asked us about git-annex, we're using
that name now" without considering how widely used it is. It's us who
decided to expose the API of seamlessly integrating 3rd party tools.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-08-18 21:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-08-17 22:06 git-bug: Distributed bug tracker embedded in git Michael Muré
2018-08-17 23:20 ` Tacitus Aedifex
2018-08-18 5:43 ` Jonathan Nieder
2018-08-18 12:24 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2018-08-18 20:42 ` Jonathan Nieder
2018-08-18 21:53 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason [this message]
2018-08-18 22:08 ` Jonathan Nieder
2018-08-18 22:19 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2018-08-18 22:26 ` Jonathan Nieder
2018-08-19 21:08 ` Jeff King
2018-08-18 16:21 ` Junio C Hamano
2018-08-19 1:27 ` Jonathan Nieder
2018-08-19 4:00 ` Kyle Meyer
2018-08-19 5:01 ` Jonathan Nieder
2018-08-18 22:50 ` Jonathan Nieder
2018-08-19 0:45 ` Michael Muré
2018-08-19 1:14 ` Michael Muré
2018-08-19 2:06 ` Elijah Newren
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=8736vbqr2p.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com \
--to=avarab@gmail.com \
--cc=Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de \
--cc=batolettre@gmail.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=jrnieder@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://80x24.org/mirrors/git.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).