Re: do people use the 'git' command?

JS> Sebastian, JS> What is the justification for removing it?

JS> As it stands, git serves a useful function in that it provides a JS> single point through which access to all git-*-scripts is channeled, JS> yet still allows each script to be maintained as a separate entity, JS> coherent entity.

If I understand him correctly, Sebastian's point was that it channels only to git-*-scripts without channelling to any of the git-* binaries.

But the real point of "git" wrapper is merely to present CVS and SVN refugees the structure they are familiar with: a single command having a set of subcommands.

It is just an "introductory" thing and there is no compelling reason to expose the low level core GIT commands. When the refugees are comfortable with how GIT does things, they will either use Porcelain and not touch the Plumbing, or they will learn to use git-* commands themselves. In the former case, not having access to core GIT commands through "git" wrapper is not an issue. In the latter case, they will learn to type git-*-script in no time, and at that point "git" wrapper will be just a short-hand; again not having access to core GIT commands through "git" wrapper is not an issue either.

Personally I think removal of "git" script is a bad idea.