Re: [PATCH v3 7/8] checkout: introduce --{,no-}overlay option

[Philip Oakley <philipoakley@talktalk.net>]

Hi,

On 24/01/2019 01:12, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> Thomas Gummerer<t.gummerer@gmail.com>  writes:
>>> Jonathan Nieder wrote:
>>>> Is this analogous to "git add --ignore-removal"?  If so, can we just
>>>> call it --ignore-removal?
>>> Yes, it seems like they are very similar.
>> Hmm, I am not sure if the word "removal" makes sense in the context
>> of "checkout", as "removal" is an_action_  just like "checking out"
>> itself is, and not a_state_.  You'd check out a state out of a tree
>> to the index and the working tree, so "checking out absence of a
>> path" may make sense, though, as "absence of a path" is a state
>> recorded in that source tree object.
> I find --ignore-removal fairly easy to understand, and I had no idea
> what --overlay would mean.

I too had difficulty initially as to what 'overlay' meant, or that there 
were options.


>
> I realize this is just one user's experience.  I'd be happy to do a
> little informal survey (e.g. taking the description from the manpage
> and asking people to name the option) if that's useful.
>
> See alsohttps://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=32212  on this subject.

I did locate a copy at 
http://zhang.ist.psu.edu/teaching/501/readings/Furnas.pdf

The whole word choosing problem does smack a bit of Orwell's Vocabulary 
C (OVC) where:

"The [Newspeak] C vocabulary encompasses words that relate specifically 
to science and to technical fields and disciplines. It is designed to 
ensure that technical knowledge remains segmented among many fields, so 
that no one individual can gain access to too much knowledge. In fact, 
there is no word for “science” " [1]

Most of the DVCS concepts have a newness to them that means that we 
don't have good words yet, hence the difficulties. Just my 2 cents.

>> The word "removal" makes little sense in "git add --ignore-removal",
>> but it and "git add --no-all" outlived their usefulness already, so
>> it may not be worth_fixing_  it.  But I am mildly opposed to spread
>> the earlier mistake to a new option.
> I think that's a good place to end up: once we flip the default for
> checkout, then --ignore-removal would be an obscure option in that
> command as well.  The consistency with "git add" is just a bonus.
>
> Thanks,
> Jonathan

Philip

[1] https://www.sparknotes.com/lit/1984/section11/