From: A Large Angry SCM <gitzilla@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2005 16:02:38 GMT
Subject: Re: git version
Message-ID: <43299B1E.1050407@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <u5tslw6qrtu.fsf@lysator.liu.se>

David Kågedal wrote:
> A Large Angry SCM <gitzilla@gmail.com> writes:
> 
>>David Kågedal wrote:
>>>Why is "git --version" called so, and not "git version"?  It works
>>>just like any other command, except that it is implemented internally
>>>in the git script.
>>>The "git" command takes a subcommand that does some action or simply
>>>prints some informational output.  The "version" subcommand fits
>>>nicely into that, and I don't see any need to prepend "--" to it.
>>>
>>Consistency with other (non Git) commands was why I suggested the 
>>"--version" form when the discussion happened.
> 
> You mean, like, "cvs version"?
> 
> Actually, cvs has both, with different semantics.

More along the lines of *ALL* the GNU utilities.