Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] branch: add a no-prefix option

"VALERI Yoann via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@gmail.com> writes:

That is unusual in multiple ways.

The usual way to do so is to give a command line option that is usable without needing any configuration. This happens first in early patches in a series.

And then, assuming that the command line option is widely supported as useful (but cumbersome to specify every time), help the users by adding a configuration variable, that can be overridden via the command line option. That happens next in later patches in a series.

And in order to help users discover these two features more easily, it is customery to give them very similar names. In other words, adding "--[no-]prefix-current-branch-name" may be more understandable if it is added in patch [1/2], if we want to make the matching configuration "branch.addCurrentBranchAsPrefix" in patch [2/2].

Even better, have you considered leaving the door open for _others_ to come up with better ideas _later_ by making it extensible, e.g.,

    --no-name-prefix
    --name-prefix=<token>

where the initial implementation the only supported <token> is "current" (to signal "current branch name")? That would mean that the corresponding configuration variable would also be a string, not a boolean, e.g., "branch.namePrefix = current".

Perhaps those who work with more than one remotes want to give their branches meant to be pushed to remote A with prefix A- while naming the branches meant to be pushed to remote B with prefix B-, or something, that is not based on the current branch but something else (e.g., @{push} in this hypothetical example). I am not saying that you should add such a support to the feature in this series (quite honestly, I am not convinced at all if prefixing with the current branch name is even something worth adding myself), but we do not want to end up with millions of branch.add${Foo}AsPrefix with different values of ${Foo} when we discover that such prefixing scheme is useful in the future.

Thanks.