From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.9 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 599A61F66F for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 15:45:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726740AbgKRPng (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Nov 2020 10:43:36 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com ([173.228.157.52]:54887 "EHLO pb-smtp20.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726089AbgKRPng (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Nov 2020 10:43:36 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 775BD10BCE7; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 10:43:34 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=3q/pef9u6hp94sS5m5k3eU26upA=; b=UyQV0S Tczhjmn/8vrtsEBtNbqbDx+sc0Pa5q2Hv24VhbPbWlDXr+GAOCSnQZIP5Z4r1cd+ rcxs0y/61lSzMnOlfepY8cEU7AFxbiXCv3MJDQYS8f2bpOjE10+4i9kpX7giNsrO /JtyMJIIPqvFp/VphmeKQAKmpHHlfvFg9+o/Y= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=YM/fHcRES1xMPB1KV5ko0vwAQAcjfuEs 5wmWBVRDoU4h2c57YnNigAaaYdXW3zvhUtsuh3YAIM6Azye5jzInda3eQQorKCRu PuQlqzywiETvGGLls28ieltBRlTyh/pdfxfYtu7LqQc+KTcbEgUjl0/OstnEm9DJ 4Uboov/nLd4= Received: from pb-smtp20.sea.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F9A910BCE6; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 10:43:34 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.74.119.39]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6F22C10BCE4; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 10:43:30 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Johannes Schindelin Cc: Jonathan Nieder , Jeff King , Felipe Contreras , "Eric W. Biederman" , Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget , Git Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/28] Use main as default branch name References: <87r1oraewl.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org> <20201117233313.GB642410@coredump.intra.peff.net> <20201118012544.GC650959@coredump.intra.peff.net> <20201118024028.GE360414@google.com> Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 07:43:28 -0800 In-Reply-To: (Johannes Schindelin's message of "Wed, 18 Nov 2020 12:32:14 +0100 (CET)") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: CEC3CD7A-29B4-11EB-A7C0-E43E2BB96649-77302942!pb-smtp20.pobox.com Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Johannes Schindelin writes: > So yes, I totally agree that triggering an interactive prompt by the empty > value is not really a good idea (nor a particularly intuitive behavior). Puzzled. Nobody talked about going interactive so far and I didn't suggest it---even though I think it is a cute idea to give a "what branch name do you want to use?" prompt, I do not think it is practical. I thought it was obvious, but the key to coming up with a name dynamically instead of using a fixed string is to derive from a cue the end user gives, not directly use what the end user gives. I do not think anybody in the discussion meant by "the thing" to literally use $(basename $(cwd)) output, but use it to derive a token that check-ref-format likes. As you may have already known when you wrote them, "My Documents" or the root directory case are red herring---it would be trivial to derive "MyDocuments" or "my-documents" for the former, and for the latter, it is totally OK for the deriving rule to come up with any of "unnamed", "initial", etc. Most of the thing you said in the message I am responding to did not make much sense to me. Perhaps you can retry after reading the message you are responding to again? Thanks.