Re: PATCH: improve git switch documentation

From: Martin <git@mfriebe.de>
Date: Jul 16, 2021, 18:31 UTC
Message-ID: <02f1f12a-0ff3-ef46-fce3-e222b2867309@mfriebe.de>
In-Reply-To: <60edb8ff814cf_ab6dd208d9@natae.notmuch>

On 13/07/2021 18:02, Felipe Contreras wrote:

Show 11 quoted lines

> Martin wrote
>> You and I will make the connection between "something happens to the
>> branch" and "something happens to the commits".
>> A lot of people with less experience, who a busy looking through lots of
>> stuff to solve their problem, they will not make that connection in that
>> particular moment.
>> Heck, I've seen highly educated people missing far more obvious things
>> like that.
> 
> Once again I'm not talking about what they could miss, I'm talking about
> what they are thinking the command will do.

Well they think it creates a new branch with the given name. And that is *all* they think.

We can argue as much as we want, that from that thought all else should follow, in reality that does not apply.

Or rather it applies only if someone really ask the question. But no one asks it.

And that leaves as with the point how much of the so called obvious is not being thought about. My answer: Quite a lot, and an important lot too.

If people would always consider the consequences of their actions, this world would have a lot less trouble.

But that again gets to the point of what is not thought of. People to not think of consequence.

If people a told the consequences some will still ignore it, but some will take it into account.

> 
> Yes, and that's stupid. There's plenty of unnecessary warnings.

Yes and that is why we do not need to add "a solarflare may damage your pc while you perform this action" (As was previously brought up)

> 
> The fact that you have to do it in USA doesn't mean you should.

Well, yes. But the point is, there are people who miss out for more obvious things. And "loosing commits" as results of an action on "branches" is not that obvious. Not if you are new.

I understand that it is as bleeding obvious to you (and me) as "hot coffee". But neither of us is a new user. Not even the average (I guess)

> 
> Our objective is not to reach everyone.
>

"everyone that uses git" (and wants to be reached)

And that should be an objective.