Re: [ANNOUNCE] GIT 0.99.9g
- From
Andreas Ericsson <ae@op5.se>
- Date
- Nov 12, 2005, 11:37 UTC
- Message-ID
- <4375D3F1.2070506@op5.se>
- In-Reply-To
- <43750A53.9090602@zytor.com>
H. Peter Anvin wrote:
Show 19 quoted lines
> Andreas Ericsson wrote: > >>> >>> It's nice in concept, but I think there are a lot of reasons why this >>> is a bad idea: >>> >>> - "man" doesn't handle it. It would be another thing if "man" could >>> be taught to understand commands like "man cvs checkout" or "man git >>> fetch". >> >> >> This is moot. man-pages can still be named git-fetch. >> > > Yes, of course, but that requires the user to be aware of yet another > program-specific convention. I do believe that supporting hierarchial > man pages would be a good thing, but one has to start that in the proper > point. >
Someone sent in a (broken) patch that pulls up the proper man-page for git help <command>
It's a rather good idea, so I'll be working it into the C implementation of git as soon as the core of it is implemented.
Show 13 quoted lines
>>> - There is no general way to teach shells etc about it, for tab >>> completion etc. >> >> >> Add the lib directory to the path (for git-<tab><tab>) or have it >> auto-evaluate the result of a git command-listing. > > > ... which means the end user has to do something specific to their > environment. > > All in all, I think the negatives outweigh the positives. >
Perhaps, but allowing the possibility of splitting them can't be wrong. When that's in place we only have to decide if we're going to or not.
-- Andreas Ericsson andreas.ericsson@op5.se OP5 AB www.op5.se Tel: +46 8-230225 Fax: +46 8-230231