Clemens Buchacher venit, vidit, dixit 07.06.2010 21:32: > On Mon, Jun 07, 2010 at 09:17:25PM +0200, Matthieu Moy wrote: >> Clemens Buchacher <drizzd@xxxxxx> writes: >> >>> But this is supposedly a feature which helps users who type "git >>> checkout <branch>" by mistake, when they really wanted to do "git >>> checkout -t <remote>/<branch>". >> >> Not sure what's the argument here, but aren't the two commands >> equivalent? Do you prefer the second syntax "git checkout -t >> <remote>/<branch>"? It's already a DWIM for "git checkout -b <branch> >> -t <remote>/<branch>", and I find this one far more confusing: >> >> git checkout <remote>/<branch> => detaches HEAD >> git checkout -t <remote>/<branch> => creates a local branch automatically > > The intent with -t is clear. It is used only when you create a new > branch. Also, you specify the remote branch you're going to create > a new branch from. > > "git checkout <branch>", on the other hand, will create a branch > based on a remote branch, even though you neither asked for a new > branch, nor did you specify any remote at all. You're making a very important point here: The existing DWIMery executes *different commands* depending on the circumstances (<branch> existing or not). "checkout" and "checkout -t/-b" really are different commands. For me, DWIMery is OK in these cases: - completing refs (<name> may be refs/heads/<name> or refs/tags/<name> etc.) - Adding options without which the other options don't make sense (independent of the circumstances), such adding "-b" for "-t", or, even doing the DWIMery above since "--track" is requested explicitly. Changing the command (mode) is something fundamentally different. [In this specific case, it also keeps the user from learning what's going on, but that's a different issue.] But I'm afraid it's too late. Michael -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html