Re: Cleaning up git user-interface warts

From: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Date: Nov 15, 2006, 19:32 UTC
Message-ID: <7vzmasld43.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>
In-Reply-To: <200611151858.51833.andyparkins@gmail.com>

Andy Parkins <andyparkins@gmail.com> writes:

Show 6 quoted lines

>> But trying to rename "pull" (or the "git" name itself) is just going to
>> cause more confusion than you fix.
>
> I don't think so.  Mainly because the proposed new git pull would be a subset 
> of the existing git pull.  It's not changing function, it's just reducing in 
> function.

We usually use the word "regression" to refer to that kind of change.

I think it makes a lot of sense having command x that does essentially the same thing as the current fetch but with more usability enhancements and more convention as built-in defaults, and another command y that does what the current 'pull .' does but with more usability enhancements and more convention as built-in defaults. I agree that kind of UI improvements would make it easier to explain to new people. Calling x "pull", however, breaks the existing users and documents, and causes confusion. I really do not think you can argue with that.

That's why we are talking about using an uncontaminated word "get". I think it is a good effort.

>> aren't that complicated. There's no reason to rename them. We do have
>> other problems:
>
> That there are other problems doesn't negate these problems.

And I think Linus is right in pointing out that there are other problems that are equally or even more pressing than _renaming_ to break things for existing users.

I personally do not think the current fetch/pull confusing, and I do see real downside in _renaming_ them, but I am open to the current get/put discussion because I think the new commands' semantics may be designed to match newcomers' expectation better (it's to match tools to newcomers instead of teaching them the new language of the land) and I do not think that approach would break existing users and documents.

For some things "matching tools to newcomers" would not really work, though. For example, I do not think you can get away with hiding index forever if you want your users to do real work in a workflow that involves merging and cherry picking.