Re: [PATCH v3 0/3] branch: let --delete-merged find squash merged branches

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Oct 22, 2026, 16:57 UTC
Message-ID: <xmqqv76thdvs.fsf@gitster.g>
In-Reply-To: <xmqqa4o5itkc.fsf@gitster.g>

Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes:

Show 11 quoted lines

> I would avoid a negative-sounding word like "irrelevant".  Your work
> is almost always relevant, at least to you.
>
> The purpose of the new feature is to find branches that the user no
> longer needs to keep because they have been practically merged.
> Perhaps --delete-integrated?  I do not know.  The naming matters,
> and I hope somebody watching from the sidelines can suggest a better
> alternative.
>
> For lack of a better alternative that I can suggest, I will use
> "--delete-foo" for the remainder of this message.

Here is a short list of candidates for "foo" I came up with.

    merged
    integrated
    subsumed
    absorbed
    included
    done

Reusing the existing --delete-merged option by extending it as --delete-merged[=<level>] is somewhat tempting. However, we frown upon options with optional values because our options by default allow option-arguments to be given as separate arguments. If we can, I would prefer to avoid doing so.

Our documentation uses "integrated" to describe practically merging your work upstream, whether by merging, rebasing, or squash-merging. However, that word is a tad too long. "subsumed", "absorbed", and "included" are shorter alternatives, but none of them is familiar in our parlance.

The word "done" may be a direct match to the mindset of our users. Once your branch is integrated upstream and you no longer need to keep pushing for its inclusion, you are "done" with it.

I dunno. I hope others will suggest something much better than any of the above ;-)