From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matthieu Moy Subject: Re: Usability question Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2009 15:09:25 +0200 Message-ID: References: <513ca40e0909170301s2b09184akb27acde76975c09b@mail.gmail.com> <20090917121328.GA21837@neumann> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: Rob Barrett , git@vger.kernel.org To: SZEDER =?iso-8859-1?Q?G=E1bor?= X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Sep 17 15:09:53 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1MoGkC-0004yf-CK for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Thu, 17 Sep 2009 15:09:52 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758658AbZIQNJl convert rfc822-to-quoted-printable (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Sep 2009 09:09:41 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753532AbZIQNJk (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Sep 2009 09:09:40 -0400 Received: from mx2.imag.fr ([129.88.30.17]:39072 "EHLO rominette.imag.fr" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758562AbZIQNJi (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Sep 2009 09:09:38 -0400 Received: from mail-veri.imag.fr (mail-veri.imag.fr [129.88.43.52]) by rominette.imag.fr (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n8HD6YMO010440 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 17 Sep 2009 15:06:34 +0200 Received: from bauges.imag.fr ([129.88.43.5]) by mail-veri.imag.fr with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA:32) (Exim 4.50) id 1MoGjl-0004qq-7A; Thu, 17 Sep 2009 15:09:25 +0200 Received: from moy by bauges.imag.fr with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1MoGjl-0000d4-5i; Thu, 17 Sep 2009 15:09:25 +0200 In-Reply-To: <20090917121328.GA21837@neumann> ("SZEDER =?iso-8859-1?Q?G=E1?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?bor=22's?= message of "Thu\, 17 Sep 2009 14\:13\:28 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/23.1.50 (gnu/linux) X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.2 (rominette.imag.fr [129.88.30.17]); Thu, 17 Sep 2009 15:06:34 +0200 (CEST) X-IMAG-MailScanner-Information: Please contact MI2S MIM for more information X-MailScanner-ID: n8HD6YMO010440 X-IMAG-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-IMAG-MailScanner-SpamCheck: X-IMAG-MailScanner-From: moy@imag.fr MailScanner-NULL-Check: 1253797595.28594@HVFoZxQxBJE0bfLP4DgUQA Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: SZEDER G=E1bor writes: > I tend to aggree, but what about 'git rebase --abort' vs. 'git rebase > --continue'? IMHO they are also doing something totally different. If I were to rewrite it, I'd call them "git rebase abort" without dashes. Not sure renaming them to subcommands is worth it though. --=20 Matthieu Moy http://www-verimag.imag.fr/~moy/