Re: [PATCH] Move all dashed form git commands to libexecdir

El 1/12/2007, a las 0:10, Johannes Schindelin escribió:

This is not a bikeshed argument and it is not an "idiotic complaint" (to use Linus' phrase). It is a legitimate concern and a *real* UI problem.

You and Linus don't care that there are 140+ Git commands and I imagine that you know exactly what each of them does.

I don't really care either because although I don't know what every single command does, I know what the 20 or 30 commands I personally need for my own workflow do.

The problem is for *newcomers* to Git who sit down for the first time and ask themselves, "Now, how do I...?". This is not an idiotic complaint but a legitimate concern about a real UI problem.

Honestly, Johannes, do you think the following is a good UI?

$ git Display all 148 possibilities? (y or n) git* git-cvsimport* git-local- fetch* git-peek-remote* git-show-index* git-add* git-cvsserver* git- log* git-prune* git-show-ref* git-add--interactive* git-daemon* git-lost- found* git-prune-packed* git-ssh-fetch* git-am* git-describe* git-ls- files* git-pull* git-ssh-pull* git-annotate* git-diff* git-ls- remote* git-push* git-ssh-push* git-apply* git-diff-files* git-ls- tree* git-quiltimport* git-ssh-upload* git-applymbox git-diff-index* git- mailinfo* git-read-tree* git-stash* git-applypatch git-diff-tree* git- mailsplit* git-rebase* git-status* git-archimport* git-fast-import* git- merge* git-rebase--interactive* git-stripspace* git-archive* git-fetch* git-merge- base* git-receive-pack* git-submodule* git-bisect* git-fetch--tool* git-merge- file* git-reflog* git-svn* git-blame* git-fetch-pack* git-merge- index* git-relink* git-svnimport git-branch* git-filter-branch* git-merge- octopus* git-remote* git-symbolic-ref* git-bundle* git-fmt-merge-msg* git-merge-one- file* git-repack* git-tag* git-cat-file* git-for-each-ref* git-merge- ours* git-repo-config* git-tar-tree* git-check-attr* git-format-patch* git-merge- recursive* git-request-pull* git-unpack-file* git-check-ref-format* git-fsck* git-merge- resolve* git-rerere* git-unpack-objects* git-checkout* git-fsck-objects* git-merge- stupid* git-reset* git-update-index* git-checkout-index* git-gc* git-merge- subtree* git-rev-list* git-update-ref* git-cherry* git-get-tar-commit-id* git-merge- tree* git-rev-parse* git-update-server-info* git-cherry-pick* git-grep* git- mergetool* git-revert* git-upload-archive* git-citool git-gui/ git- mktag* git-rm* git-upload-pack* git-clean* git-hash-object* git- mktree* git-runstatus* git-var* git-clone* git-http-fetch* git- mv* git-send-email* git-verify-pack* git-commit* git-http-push* git-name- rev* git-send-pack* git-verify-tag* git-commit-tree* git-imap-send* git-pack- objects* git-sh-setup* git-whatchanged* git-config* git-index-pack* git-pack- redundant* git-shell* git-write-tree* git-convert-objects git-init* git-pack- refs* git-shortlog* gitk git-count-objects* git-init-db* git-parse- remote* git-show* git-cvsexportcommit* git-instaweb* git-patch- id* git-show-branch*

Would you argue that this screenshot shows a sane UI?

<http://wincent.com/tmp/git-ui.png>

Note: I am not complaining about the *number* of commands; I myself  
find them highly useful for scripting. I am saying that the  
*visibility* of those commands is the problem. That's why I support  
the efforts to move most of this stuff out of the default PATH. We're  
not talking about getting rid of it, just about putting it somewhere  
more appropriate in order to correct what is basically a *hideous*  
user interface for the beginner.

Cheers, Wincent