Re: [PATCH 0/3] git help: group common commands by theme
- From
Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
- Date
- May 6, 2015, 20:49 UTC
- Message-ID
- <CAPig+cTztwF-pYGjEpjDzxTJSXQBJFcp_F924htx5fHT01mcKQ@mail.gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <554A78EE.1040002@gmail.com>
On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 4:26 PM, Sébastien Guimmara <sebastien.guimmara@gmail.com> wrote:
Show 28 quoted lines
> On 05/06/2015 05:08 AM, Eric Sunshine wrote: >> On Mon, May 4, 2015 at 4:28 PM, Sébastien Guimmara >> <sebastien.guimmara@gmail.com> wrote: >>> - Add a [groups] block containing names and description for groups: >>> >>> [groups] >>> init starting a working area >>> >>> - Add a [commands] header on top of the known command list, and >>> group names as a third column. >>> >>> [commands] >>> git-add mainporcelain common-worktree >> >> Thanks, this version is looking better. I, personally, still find the >> redundant "command-" prefix ugly and would just as soon see it go >> away. I'll make some suggestions about that when reviewing patch 2/3. > > Indeed, I'm a bit annoyed by this prefix. We could do two things: > - either drop the [deprecated] options, since it's never used. > - or keep it, but make it exclusive with [common]. It makes sense after > all that if a command is deprecated, we don't want to consider it > common anymore. > > In both cases, we end up with only three columns, the third being > optional. > > The common- prefix can then be removed in favor of the group ID alone.
Sorry for not yet reviewing patch 2/3. I'm trying to find time to review it and make the promised suggestions, however, Real Life keeps getting in the way. If 'deprecated' has never been used and if it is not likely to be used in the future, then dropping that column may indeed be an easy way forward toward the goal of eliminating the "common-" prefix. A possible shortcoming of this columnar approach, however, is that if someone someday comes up with some new type of attribute to assign in a new column, then you still end up in the same boat where not all entries use all columns, and you have difficulty figuring out to which column an attribute belongs.
Instead, as mentioned originally, I had envisioned a solution in which any command tagged with an attribute mentioned in [groups] would be considered common, without having to resort to a prefix or fixed columns. This should be more flexible in the long run, but may be overkill for present day. I think that awk should be able to handle this easily, but haven't had the time to actually sit down and flesh it out (which I wanted to do while reviewing 2/3).
And, any solution is likely going to have to take into account the two Makefiles Junio mentioned.