Re: git switch/restore, still experimental?

From: Sergey Organov <sorganov@gmail.com>
Date: May 5, 2021, 19:26 UTC
Message-ID: <87y2ct56dh.fsf@osv.gnss.ru>
In-Reply-To: <6092da0ccf4e9_1d24520833@natae.notmuch>

Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com> writes:

Show 24 quoted lines

> Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
>> In summary, I think it should be changed to act like this:
>>     
>>     |---------------------------+------------------------+---------------------------|
>>     | What | Now | New |
>>     |---------------------------+------------------------+---------------------------|
>>     | Switch | git switch existing | git switch existing |
>>     | Error | git switch nonexisting | <no change (errors)> |
>>     | Switch with --merge | git switch -m branch | git switch
>>     | --merge branch |
>>     | Create | git switch -c new | git switch -n new |
>>     | Create from existing | N/A | git switch -c new [<old>] |
>>     | Move & switch to existing | N/A | git switch -m new [<old>] |
>>     |---------------------------+------------------------+---------------------------|
>
> I'm in favor of this too.
>
>> In its current state I find "git switch" to be unusable. That sounds
>> like dramatic hyperbole, but I'm serious.
>
> I concur.
>
> I've tried to use it multiple times, and I always come back to using git
> branch / git checkout.

I didn't look at these commands till recently, and what I immediately noticed is very unclear manual pages. I didn't read entire pages, but DESCRIPTIONS sections and some options I did check. I think that even if these commands are to be considered stable by now, the manual pages themselves need to be heavily revised before removing the EXPERIMENTAL label.

It'll be worse if unclear manual is just a symptom of unclear design though.

Thanks, -- Sergey Organov