Re: [PATCH] git-stash: alias 'list' to 'ls' and 'clear' to 'rm'

From: Tim Stoakes <tim@stoakes.net>
Date: Feb 5, 2008, 11:20 UTC
Message-ID: <20080205112000.GD29545@mail.stoakes.net>
In-Reply-To: <D512F3C0-3354-40BB-BD8D-8B3A85196825@wincent.com>

Wincent Colaiuta(win@wincent.com)@050208-12:06:

Show 9 quoted lines

> El 5/2/2008, a las 11:38, Tim Stoakes escribi?:
>
>> clear::
>> +rm::
>> 	Remove all the stashed states. Note that those states will then
>> 	be subject to pruning, and may be difficult or impossible to recover.
>
> Isn't "rm" a bit misleading here? Seeing as the clear subcommand really 
> does an "rm -rf".

$ git stash clear foo git stash clear with parameters is unimplemented

It appears that 'clear' is intended to behave like 'rm', however, it isn't implemented yet.

> Also, is there any other precedent in the command suite for abbreviating 
> subcommand names in that way (ie. not just by shortening them, but by using 
> alternative names based on filesystem commands)? It strikes me as a bit 
> inconsistent.

For example 'git remote' uses 'rm', and there exists 'git rm', 'git ls-files', 'git ls-remotes' etc. Granted, these are not abbreviations of other (also available) longer term. The fact that some commands use shell command names, and others use words, appears to be the inconsistency to me. However, renaming 'git stash list' to 'git stash ls' would break compatibility, so seemed too heavy to me.

Tim

-- 
Tim Stoakes