Re: What's cooking in git.git (Dec 2010, #01; Sat, 4)

From: Miles Bader <miles@gnu.org>
Date: Dec 6, 2010, 09:13 UTC
Message-ID: <AANLkTinJu0KzXZ2Rjbs2+XH7T=Gq5MOajxo51DHtqoGZ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20101206094806.10ae1ff2@chalon.bertin.fr>

On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 5:48 PM, Yann Dirson <dirson@bertin.fr> wrote:

> In the end, I still think the implications for the usability are what
> matters, more than arguing about a subtle nuance of vocabulary.

There is no "usability" problem.

it's is normal and good that option names are sometimes revisited and improved -- nothing is perfect on the first try. By keeping the old option around as a deprecated alias, we avoid compatibility issues. That doesn't mean there aren't _any_ issues, but they tend to be pretty minor (such as the "space used by the deprecation option" that you complain about).

Maybe if you renamed every option simultaneously, there would be confusion, but seriously, it's only one option. It's not going to be a problem.

-Miles

-- 
Cat is power.  Cat is peace.