Jon Loeliger wrote: > > That way: > "git mer" would fail > "git merge" would run "git-merge" > "git merge-" would fail > "git merge-o" would fail, > "git-merge-oc" would run "git-merge-octopus". > > Any interest? Overkill? Bad idea? > I think it's overkill. It would be better, methinks, to add mnemonic-ish shorthands for the porcelainish commands, so that git fp => git-format-patch git co => git-checkout git up => git-update-index git octo => git-merge-octopus git fsck => git-fsck-objects git hash => git-hash-object and so on... This because non-ambiguous is rarely logical (for git at least, which has 'git-<family>-<action | object-type>) unless one knows the entire command anyways. Ambiguity may also be introduced by later commands, and then you'll need to re-learn them. I always find that annoying. -- Andreas Ericsson andreas.ericsson@op5.se OP5 AB www.op5.se Tel: +46 8-230225 Fax: +46 8-230231 - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.htmlReceived on Wed Dec 07 08:23:04 2005
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2005-12-07 08:23:10 EST