From: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Date: Sat, 16 Dec 2006 13:26:03 GMT
Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH 2/2] git-svn: rename 'commit' command to 'set-tree'
Message-ID: <7vbqm4ezv8.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>
In-Reply-To: <11662558902535-git-send-email-normalperson@yhbt.net>

Eric Wong <normalperson@yhbt.net> writes:

> 'set-tree' probably accurately describes what the command
> formerly known as 'commit' does.
>
> I'm not entirely sure that 'dcommit' should be renamed to 'commit'
> just yet...  Perhaps 'push' or 'push-changes'?

I think Pasky did such a three-way rename to avoid breaking
people's fingers.  I thought it was a reasonable transition
strategy, but some people might say its only effect was to break
people's fingers not just once but twice, so Pasky himself
and/or Cogito users may have some input on this.

We are talking about major UI change between 1.4 series and
v1.5.0 on the core Porcelain-ish side, so if you feel confident
that things would settle down in a month or so in the git-svn
front, it may be a good idea to roll sweeping changes into the
same timeframe.