From: Dragan Simic <dsimic@manjaro.org>
Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2024 19:55:33 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH] branch: rework the descriptions of rename and copy operations
Message-ID: <35738a93f5cbace5b3235ce614b7afbf@manjaro.org>
In-Reply-To: <xmqq8r3g8caz.fsf@gitster.g>

Hello Junio,

On 2024-02-19 20:49, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Dragan Simic <dsimic@manjaro.org> writes:
> 
>> Regarding the branch copy and rename operations and their argument
>> names, perhaps the following would be a good choice:
>> 
>>     --copy [<branch>] <destination>
>>     --move [<branch>] <destination>
>> 
>> It would clearly reflect the nature of the performed operations, while
>> still using "<branch>" consistently, this time to refer to the source
>> branch.  Using "<destination>" to select the destination name should
>> be pretty much self-descriptive, if you agree.
> 
> Awful.  While I was skimming the messages without reading the
> Subject line (hence without realizing that this is about improving
> the existing documentation and not adding new features), I thought
> that these two are about moving branch to a remote repository that
> is named with <destination>.
> 
> My advice would be to stick to <old> vs <new> that contrasts well.

I appreciate the directness and honesty.  How about using "<oldbranch>"
and "<newbranch>" instead, which, although more wordy, would be more
consistent with "<branch>" that's used in a number of other places?
Such consistency should make the users recognize the arguments better
at first glance.