Re: PATCH: improve git switch documentation

From: Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com>
Date: Jul 12, 2021, 17:09 UTC
Message-ID: <60ec7741640d5_a452520863@natae.notmuch>
In-Reply-To: <f0770358-be4c-a747-0851-b2fd73c1978e@mfriebe.de>

Martin wrote:

Show 26 quoted lines

> On 12/07/2021 18:24, Felipe Contreras wrote:
> > Sergey Organov wrote:
> > Even standardizing `git branch` would be an almost-impossible task, even
> > if we manage to convince others. `git new branch` even more impossible.
> > 
> 
> Not sure but from the glance at hg that I took, they seem to use the 
> plural for nouns.
> 
> So then we could have
> 
>    git branch <new-branch-name>
> 
>    git branches new   // long version
>    git branches list
>    git branches delete
>    ....
> 
> However, standardizing to a fixed verb/noun rule will still be more than 
> a challenge.
> 
> The above would as guildeline be
> 
>    git verb
> or
>    git plural-noun verb

I don't see what's wrong with considering the second form a subcommand:

  git $subcommand $verb

Like `git bisect start`. That way you could consider `branches` to be a subcommand, it doesn't need to be a plural noun.

Show 10 quoted lines

> Yet try to do that with
>    git status
>    git log
> 
> I don't see how a better alternative for those can be found. One that 
> actually is accepted because it's better, not just because it follows a 
> rule.
> 
> status, is not a verb
> log is the wrong verb, or again a noun.

If `git branch` is a shorthand for `git branches new`, the you could consider `git status` to be the a shortcut for `git status show`, but since there's no other action to be done with the status subcommand, then it's always implied.

-- 
Felipe Contreras