Re: [PATCH v3] build: add default aliases
- From
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
- Date
- Oct 17, 2013, 19:51 UTC
- Message-ID
- <xmqqppr3znf1.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <525e0b6e25aeb_81a151de7495@nysa.notmuch>
Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com> writes:
Show 21 quoted lines
> Junio C Hamano wrote: >> Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes: >> >> > It seems[1] that some >> > people define "ci" as "commit -a", and some people define "st" as >> > "status -s" or even "status -sb". >> >> These option variants aside. >> >> Just like thinking that committing must be the same as publishing, >> it is a cvs/svn induced braindamage to think that "checking in" must >> be the same as "committing". The former is a sign of not >> understanding the "distributed", the latter "the index". >> >> In a world with both check-in and commit as two words usable to >> denote possibly different concepts, it may make sense to say "you >> check-in the current status of the working tree files into the >> index, in order to make commits out of it later". > > Yet a wide amount of users do use 'ci' to mean 'commit', so basically they are > just wrong. So you are saying they are just ignorant.
I am sick of seeing my word twisted, especially when they were not even addressed to you (see the message's primary recipients list). Those who want to type "git ci" due to their familiarity with "svn ci" are not wrong; they can do so if they choose.
Let's try again (see below).
Show 5 quoted lines
> Now, if you are commenting on the aliases, that would mean you are not against > the idea of aliaes per se, but more about values of those aliases. So if we > agreed on the right values, you would welcome this patch. > > Is that correct?
No.
I agree with the issue the message I was replying to raised. The alias mechanism is a way to help users to define their own convenient short-cut. If you want to say "git ci" to mean "git commit" (and not "git commit -a" or something else), define it for your own use, and stop there, without getting in the way of other people. That is why I see an attempt to add hard-coded set of aliases as a move in the wrong direction.
A set of hard-coded alias that _officially_ declares that "checkin" is an equivalent to "commit" has another issue. It will close the door for us to later add "git checkin" that may mean something different from "git commit", and that is another reason why I do not agree with the patch under discussion in this thread. A "checkin" that is an operation that checks-in the current contents to the index is one example of an action other than committing that the word may make sense for, because "git checkout README.txt" is about checking out of the index, its logical opposite "checkin" could be about checking into the index.