James Denholm wrote: > Felipe Contreras wrote: > >This is a false dichotomy; there aren't just two kinds > > of Git users. > > > > There is such a category of Git users who are not > > fresh-out-of-the-boat, yet not power users either. > > Oh, I didn't mean to suggest a dichotomy of any kind. However these are the > two groups (I suggest) are the most immediately relevant - one calls for > change, and the other would be negatively impacted. Nobody would be negatively impacted. Who would be impacted negatively by having default aliases? > > Unless the aliases are already there by default. > > Others, with knowledge far beyond mine, have pointed out the problems > with this. And I have showed they are not problems. > I'd suggest the argument most relevant to my own statements is how it impacts > the learning proccess, and makes it more likely that users will learn aliases > _as_ commands, which of course is incorrect and potentially harmful. That is an assumption. Why would a user think 'co' is a command? > > And if default aliases were such a bad idea, why do most (all?) version > > control systems out there have them? > > I'm so tempted just to sass and say that it's because they aren't git... > > But on a more serious note, a feature (any feature) being in one vcs doesn't > mean, by default, that it's right for git. How is Git different from any other version control systems? Commands are commands. > The status quo may be a mistake on the part of it's followers. Yes, it might, but it's not. > (And, historically, has been many times - for an transculturally-acceptable > example, consider the rejection of Galileo's astronomical research by the > Vatican of the time.) Yes, I'm perfecly aware that everybody _can_ be wrong, that doesn't mean they _are_. > Just because Mercurial et. all does something doesn't mean git needs to, or > even should. It needs objective consideration, not to just be ushered through > on the basis of tradition. Again, this is a red herring. Nobody argued that Git should do this because others are doing it. You failed to answer the question, so I'm asking it again: If default aliases were such a bad idea, why do most (all?) version control systems out there have them? Your answer seems to be along the lines of: they made a mistake and they are all wrong. Is it? But, surely if it's a mistake on their part you should be able to find people affected by this horrible error. This would validate the arguments that others have put forward; if we do X we will have problem Y. Well, other projects have done X, do they have problem Y? -- Felipe Contreras -- 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