Re: git annoyances
- From
Jean-Christian de Rivaz <jc@eclis.ch>
- Date
- Apr 10, 2008, 06:08 UTC
- Message-ID
- <47FDAEEF.3090004@eclis.ch>
- In-Reply-To
- <7vfxtu3fku.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org>
Junio C Hamano a écrit :
Show 15 quoted lines
> That made us allowing the users to type "git pull" and "git fetch" without > parameters. This is generally a good thing: shorter to type for doing > common things is always good, as long as the user knows what he is doing. > > But at the same time, this allowed docs and cheat-sheets that mention only > the form without parameters and not the normative "repository refspec" > form. This dumbed down the users not understand that in that context > fetch (and pull, which is a fetch followed by a merge) is always happening > against a single branch of single remote repository, the way to name > remote repository and its branch(es) is to give them as separate > parameters, and their not typing the pair explicitly is a mere convenience > feature. This particular aspect of the shorthand is actually very bad. > It makes the mental model fuzzy, and hiding important rules of how the > world works from new people would lead them to unnecessary confusion. In > short, we made it harder for the new people to "get" it.
A possible way it to, by default, make git print the full form of the command when a short form is used. So the user see the concept without having to read the documentation and learn it gradually. I personally like tools that act this way. It permit to make a basic and easy tutorial with short commands that let know the general concept and show the full potential of the tool.
A "short form" flag in a user (not repository) configuration file should allow to suppress the long form printout for the comfort of the users that don't want it.
-- Jean-Christian de Rivaz