Re: [PATCH/RFC v3 00/14] Introduce new commands switch-branch and restore-files

From: Duy Nguyen <pclouds@gmail.com>
Date: Nov 30, 2018, 05:41 UTC
Message-ID: <CACsJy8BZ7s2TbqiO+hensOF0quz+N3h5+GwKqiNTakGaGJ2yeA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <xmqqefb3mhrs.fsf@gitster-ct.c.googlers.com>

On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 3:16 AM Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:

Show 12 quoted lines

>
> Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy  <pclouds@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > 'git switch-branch'
> >
> > - implicit detaching is rejected. If you need to detach, you need to
> >   give --detach. Or stick to 'git checkout'.
>
> OK.  Is "auto-vivify the named branch based on a remote-tracking"
> also rejected, as it is a confusing behaviour that is a too subtle
> and implicit, just like the detaching head is, and require --guess
> or sticking to 'git checkout'?  I think it should.

This touches the "remote" concept which I think is another confusing thing for new people (your "master" is not the same as the server's "master", aka origin/master) and perhaps this dwim thing helps. Frankly I don't do dwim much so I don't know if it's that often used.

Show 6 quoted lines

> > - -b/-B is renamed to -c/-C with long option names
>
> I did not expect that these two are the only options that would be
> out of place with the command name split, but presumably you looked
> at all options for both of the two new commands to see if they made
> sense in the new context?

Yeah (at least the description in struct option[] array) -- Duy