From: Stephen R. van den Berg Date: Tue, 27 May 2008 13:52:59 GMT Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH] git-what: explain what to do next Message-ID: <20080527135259.GA12551@cuci.nl> In-Reply-To: <8aa486160805270637m3fc640bfr9fa51eb917460e5c@mail.gmail.com> Santi B?jar wrote: >On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 3:12 PM, Johannes Schindelin > wrote: >> Sure it is. But cluttering up the commands for something that is not >> really proven to be wanted by many is IMO inferior. >This is an argument against git-whatzzup.sh in general. Point taken. Not really. It's an argument against cluttering up the existing core with this stuff. >Moreover, this could be integrated in "git status". I personally have no need for such a thing, but in effect it is the git commandline equivalent of MS-Office "Clippy", which provides a hands-on tutorial in git while you are trying to use it (with the subtle yet important difference that it only provides advice when called). So if you'd keep it confined to a shell script externally from the core commands, I could imagine a lot of new (or occasional) users of git being rather happy with an "interactive manual/hands-on tutorial" like this. -- Sincerely, srb@cuci.nl Stephen R. van den Berg. Skiing beyond this point may result in death and/or loss of skiing privileges.