From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Sun, 07 Apr 2019 13:43:47 GMT
Subject: Re: git glossary --help ?
Message-ID: <xmqqlg0mc4mk.fsf@gitster-ct.c.googlers.com>
In-Reply-To: <CACsJy8DE4WfbU2y8+__4qD7V5FLodKjxX-bu+seE8mh65q8FYQ@mail.gmail.com>

Duy Nguyen <pclouds@gmail.com> writes:

> Phew... I didn't break anything!
>
> That behavior has been gone since 2c6b6d9f7d (help: make option --help
> open man pages only for Git commands, 2016-08-26). Ralf did not
> mention why he thought "git <concept> --help" was a bad idea. But it
> was considered a bug by Junio [1]
>
> [1] https://public-inbox.org/git/CAPc5daXicjUDi6B-MA8Sn=_UZ_jHvc8SE4ZXt2dHbbDQkD7=WA@mail.gmail.com/

I do not think you are reading me correctly.

Yes, I do consider that "git foo --help" that does not say "there is
no subcomand 'foo' in Git suite" is a bug.  But that is only for
'foo' that is clearly meant as a command.

I do not imagine anybody labelling "git help glossary" as a bug.

I am fairly neutral about "git glossary --help".  I personally would
not ask git like so, as "glossary" is clearly not a command name,
and the "--help" option is clearly meant as an option to the
subcommand, which means that the request logically does not make
much sense.

But unlike "git foo --help", if the word that ought to name a
subcommand instead names a known concept, e.g. "glossary", I do not
think it is too bad if we DWIMmed what the user meant to say,
i.e. turning "git glossary --help" into "git help glossary".