Re: [PATCH] Documentation: add a planning document for the next CLI revamp
- From
Theodore Tso <tytso@mit.edu>
- Date
- Oct 30, 2008, 23:27 UTC
- Message-ID
- <20081030232717.GB10779@mit.edu>
- In-Reply-To
- <1225389068.19891.28.camel@maia.lan>
On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 10:51:08AM -0700, Sam Vilain wrote:
Show 5 quoted lines
> > Well, I don't have strong feelings on the exact command name used; I > suggested "undo", probably also ambiguous. But still, a significant > number of users are surprised when they type 'git revert' and they get a > backed out patch.
Yeah, that's why I suggested "git revert-file". It's less ambiguous than "undo", and it's easier for people used to "hg revert" and "svn revert" to find "git revert-file". And, it won't be run accidentally by old-timers who are used to the old (to be deprecated) "git revert". But I'm not that picky about the name; I just missed the "git undo" proposal in your patch.
> Making it plain "revert" would violate expectations of existing users; > it seems a better idea to just deprecate it, and point the users to the > new method - cherry-pick --revert - or the command they might have meant > - whatever that becomes.
Yup, I agree; that's why I suggested "git revert-file".
- Ted