Re: Tool renames? was Re: First stab at glossary

From: Daniel Barkalow <barkalow@iabervon.org>
Date: Sep 4, 2005, 17:23 UTC
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.63.0509041318390.23242@iabervon.org>
In-Reply-To: <7vy86e5zbf.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>

On Sat, 3 Sep 2005, Junio C Hamano wrote:

Show 8 quoted lines

> Daniel Barkalow <barkalow@iabervon.org> writes:
> 
> > I think "fetch" is more applicable to what they do.
> 
> OK.  then they are git-http-fetch and friends.  How about
> git-ssh-push?  The counterpart of fetch-pack/clone-pack is
> called upload-pack, so would git-ssh-upload make things more
> consistent?  I dunno.

I like that idea.

Show 7 quoted lines

> > I don't think it matters very much whether something is a script or not; 
> > on the other hand, it would be good to have "git" list a reasonable set of 
> > commands to use through the interface, which would exclude, for example, 
> > git-merge-one-file-script, and include the above commands.
> 
> Are you suggesting to drop -script from git-merge-one-file?
> Then git-cherry should perhaps keep its current name.

I'd suggest it get a different ending, like .sh or -helper. That way, it's distinct both from binaries and from scripts that people run directly.

	-Daniel
*This .sig left intentionally blank*