On Thu, 16 Nov 2006, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote: > Linus Torvalds escreveu: > > - git itself has now done it that way for the last 18 months, and the > > fact is, the people _complaining_ are a small subset of the people who > > actually use git on a daily basis and don't complain. > > > that's not a good argument; the set of git users is a small subset of those > that looked at git, and dismissed it because they couldn't wrap their heads > around it. And I've said this again, and I'll say it once more: that has basically _nothing_ to do with whether you spell "pull" as "pull" or "merge". The reason people have trouble wrapping their heads around git is because they have been braindamaged by CVS and SVN, and just don't understand the fairly fundamental new concepts and workflow. That's totally different from then arguing about stupid naming issues. Peopel seem to believe that changign a few names or doing other totally _minimal_ UI changes would somehow magically make things understandable. I claim that isn't so at all. The fact is, git is different from CVS and SVN, and git _has_ to be different from CVS and SVN. It has to be different because the whole model of CVS and SVN is simpyl fundamentally BROKEN. > It's worth trying to get those on board by fixing the annoying > little issues that have popped up in this thread. I claim that those "annoying little issues" are totally made up by people who had trouble wrapping their minds about git, and then make up reasons that have nothing to do with reality for why that might be so. Let's face it, you could just alias "merge" to "pull", and it wouldn't really change ANYTHING. You'd still have to learn the new model. Linus - 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