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=-2.5 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,HK_RANDOM_FROM,MSGID_FROM_MTA_HEADER, RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 From: Sean Subject: Re: Cleaning up git user-interface warts Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2006 10:03:59 -0500 Message-ID: References: <87k61yt1x2.wl%cworth@cworth.org> <455A1137.8030301@shadowen.org> <87hcx1u934.wl%cworth@cworth.org> <87bqn9u43s.wl%cworth@cworth.org> <7vr6w5y7to.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <7virhhy76h.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <7vu011qnl6.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2006 15:04:37 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Junio C Hamano , Nicolas Pitre , git@vger.kernel.org, Andy Whitcroft , Carl Worth Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org X-Originating-IP: [65.93.43.81] X-Originating-Email: [seanlkml@sympatico.ca] Original-Message-Id: <20061115100359.5bfbe5c9.seanlkml@sympatico.ca> In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 2.2.9 (GTK+ 2.10.4; i386-redhat-linux-gnu) X-OriginalArrivalTime: 15 Nov 2006 15:13:31.0937 (UTC) FILETIME=[9CBB9910:01C708C8] Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GkMJN-0001oY-PU for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Wed, 15 Nov 2006 16:04:26 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1030535AbWKOPEG (ORCPT ); Wed, 15 Nov 2006 10:04:06 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1030538AbWKOPEF (ORCPT ); Wed, 15 Nov 2006 10:04:05 -0500 Received: from bayc1-pasmtp11.bayc1.hotmail.com ([65.54.191.171]:58002 "EHLO BAYC1-PASMTP11.CEZ.ICE") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1030535AbWKOPEC (ORCPT ); Wed, 15 Nov 2006 10:04:02 -0500 Received: from linux1.attic.local ([65.93.43.81]) by BAYC1-PASMTP11.CEZ.ICE over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 15 Nov 2006 07:13:31 -0800 Received: from guru.attic.local ([10.10.10.28]) by linux1.attic.local with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GkLMs-0003ir-Vv; Wed, 15 Nov 2006 09:03:59 -0500 To: Johannes Schindelin Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 15 Nov 2006 15:01:47 +0100 (CET) Johannes Schindelin wrote: > I am really opposed to do "gh pull". Not only because of "gh" being > completely confusing (we already _have_ "git", and for porcelains > different TLAs), but "pull" _really_ is confusing by now. And Mercurial > did not help one wit by insisting on their own interpretation. This makes a lot of sense. The "git" command isn't damaged so bad that it can't be saved in a backward compatible way, at least for a transition period. Adding a new command name seems like a step backward. > Why not do something like "get/put" instead? It is > > - easier to remember > - not bogus (AFAICT the meaning is not used in diametrical senses) > - shorter to type than download/upload > > As for "git merge": Just by the number of arguments you can discern > between the original usage and the new usage, so I am all in favour of > replacing "git pull " by "git merge ". Where "" > can be a branch or a remote or a URL (with cogito style #branchname). Both these ideas sound like a step in the right direction too.