Re: should git command and git-command be equivalent?

From: David Symonds <dsymonds@gmail.com>
Date: Oct 16, 2007, 12:28 UTC
Message-ID: <ee77f5c20710160528k520704d7pd3cf99dea1f83a77@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <vpqk5pnmoah.fsf@bauges.imag.fr>

On 16/10/2007, Matthieu Moy <Matthieu.Moy@imag.fr> wrote:

Show 13 quoted lines

> "franky" <yinping@kooxoo.com> writes:
>
> >> Also, you can use aliases (for example, I type "git st" to do "git
> >> status") with "git whatever", but not with "git-whatever" (unless you
> >> define the alias in your shell).
> > I try "git st", but it complains "git: 'st' is not a git-command".
>
> Sure, I'm talking about aliases, so what I meant is that I had
>
> [alias]
>         st = status
>
> in ~/.gitconfig.

If you use the contrib/completion/git-completion.bash script, you can type "git st<TAB>", and it'll complete it for you. Well, it did, until git-stash came along and ruined it...

At any rate, the bash completion also completes things like branch names, which can be immensely helpful.

Dave.