Re: What's cooking in git.git (topics)

From: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Date: Jul 20, 2008, 22:24 UTC
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.1.00.0807210020420.3305@eeepc-johanness>
In-Reply-To: <7vd4l85nv5.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org>

Hi,

On Sun, 20 Jul 2008, Junio C Hamano wrote:

Show 29 quoted lines

> Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> writes:
> 
> >> I personally think -sstrategy=string1,string2,... is simply a bad taste.
> >> 
> >> Why force yourself to parse things by having the users to concatenate
> >> something that the user could give us separated?  If you care about the
> >> order and association between strategy and their options, you can always
> >> do:
> >> 
> >> 	-s strategy1 -X option-1-for-strategy-1 -X option-2-for-strategy-1 \
> >> 	-s strategy2 -X option-1-for-strategy-2 ...
> >
> > You mean something like
> >
> > 	$ git merge -s subtree -X --path -X git-gui/ git-gui/master
> >
> > Wow. :-)
> 
> I would envision it to be more like:
> 
> 	$ git merge -s subtree -Xpath=git-gui git-gui/master
> 
> which git-merge internally would turn into:
> 
> 	$ git-merge-subtree --path=git-gui HEAD -- OURS THEIRS
> 
> That way both the external command line (that the end users do care about)
> and the internal one (that the strategy programmer would care about) look
> a lot more sensible than your command line, don't they?

I still find it a lot easier to explain

	$ git -s subtree=git-gui git-gui/master

to a new user than your command line, especially since

	$ git -X path=git-gui -s subtree git-gui/master

would be a not so obvious mistake, _and_ especially since the implementation of your option parsing would be rather ugly.

But the subject has been discussed to death, and you seem to still prefer the -X way, so I give up.

You win, Dscho "who can adapt even to a syntax he does not like"