threads / rfc / 1922

[RFC] Do we still need the git command?

Subject: [RFC] Do we still need the git command?

## tl;dr

3 messages between Sep 23, 2005 and Sep 23, 2005.

replies: 2people: 3as markdown or json

Robert Watson· Sep 23, 2005, 11:24 UTC · lore

Hello,

The function of the git command:

(1) As an alias for git-command. After the recent big tool rename, all "git command" can be replaced by "git-command". (2) Report version number. This can be solved by a git-version command. (3) List interesting commands. This can be taken care by man git(7) or TAB-TAB. Or, add a git-help command to list only interesting commands.

How about get rid of the git command all together?

Cons: (1) Another change of the user interface; (2) Different style from CVS/SVN.

Pros: (1) Consistency. There is only one way to do it. People won't be wondering what's the difference between "git-diff" and "git diff". (2) Performance. One less shell script to parse and one less exec system call. (3) TAB completion. git-whatchanged and other long commands are easier to type with TAB completion. TAB-TAB also shows you all available commands. (4) Do not conflict with GNU Interactive Tools. Make the life of Debian people easier.

What do you think?

Robertoo

Martin Langhoff· Sep 23, 2005, 11:38 UTC · re: Robert Watson · lore

Re: [RFC] Do we still need the git command?

On 9/23/05, Robert Watson <robert.oo.watson@gmail.com> wrote:

> (2) Different style from CVS/SVN.

That is a plus in my book -- CVS implemented an awful UI, and everyone else followed. CVS did make use if it in that it discriminated options to the cvs utility from command options.

> Pros:
> (4) Do not conflict with GNU Interactive Tools.  Make the life of
> Debian people easier.

+1! Anything to avoid yet another flamewar in debian-devel ;-) and it also shows some good manners towards a (mostly forgotten) but good project. The whole name conflict prompted me to install the GNU Interactive Tools and run it for a couple of days. Nifty little "midnight-commander" style utility.

cheers,

martin

Sebastian Kuzminsky· Sep 23, 2005, 12:39 UTC · re: Martin Langhoff · lore

Re: [RFC] Do we still need the git command?

Martin Langhoff <martin.langhoff@gmail.com> wrote:

Show 9 quoted lines

> > Pros:
> > (4) Do not conflict with GNU Interactive Tools.  Make the life of
> > Debian people easier.
> 
> +1! Anything to avoid yet another flamewar in debian-devel ;-) and it
> also shows some good manners towards a (mostly forgotten) but good
> project. The whole name conflict prompted me to install the GNU
> Interactive Tools and run it for a couple of days. Nifty little
> "midnight-commander" style utility.

I've been talking with the Debian maintainer of GNU Interactive Tools about this. He says he's agreed with his upstream maintainer to change the name of their git. I dont know if he means they'll change their name in the upstream package or just in the Debian package. I offered to do the work for them and do an NMU, but then I havent heard from them for about 2 weeks, so I'm not sure what their status is.

"Ha ha, we sure bullied them into doing it our way."

-- 
Sebastian Kuzminsky