From: David Tweed Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2008 00:04:09 GMT Subject: Re: About git pretty Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <7vd4k062k2.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> On Sat, Aug 23, 2008 at 12:41 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > "Felipe Contreras" writes: >> It is just me or 'pretty full' doesn't exactly convey the meaning of >> the action to execute? [snip] >> If you like the idea I can work on a patch. > > FWIW, I don't like it. It's probably much too late to change conventions given the number of deployed scripts, but one of the annoyances for me about git is that a lot of the commands/options names are based on what the code does/is written rather than relating to what a user who doesn't know or care about the inner workings expects as output. For instance, I imagine the --pretty gets its name because a pretty printing routine, called pretty_print_commit in the code, was written but the name probably doesn't make much sense to anyone who's not from a computer science background. Likewise the options --hard, --soft and --mixed to git reset lack any natural mnemonic structure. (I'm sure one can be contrived, but I doubt it'd be particularly natural.) Then there's git-fsck and gitk. It's not remotely a big problem but it is something that I'd imagine would have been done differently with hindsight. -- cheers, dave tweed__________________________ david.tweed@gmail.com Rm 124, School of Systems Engineering, University of Reading. "while having code so boring anyone can maintain it, use Python." -- attempted insult seen on slashdot