On Sunday 25 March 2018 10:03 AM, Jeff King wrote: > ... > but I'd prefer to avoid those kinds of magic rules if we can. They're > very hard to explain to the user, and can be quite baffling when they go > wrong. > I fell the same too. > IMHO we should do one of: > > 1. Nothing. ;) > > 2. Complain about "-l" in list mode to help educate users about the > current craziness. > > 3. Drop "-l" (probably with a deprecation period); it seems unlikely > to me that anybody uses it for branch creation, and this would at > least reduce the confusion (then it would just be "so why don't we > have -l" instead of "why is -l not what I expect"). > > 4. Repurpose "-l" as a shortcut for --list (also after a deprecation > period). This is slightly more dangerous in that it may confuse > people using multiple versions of Git that cross the deprecation > line. But that's kind of what the deprecation period is for... > I think we should do 2 as a short term fix for sure. For the long term, I would prefer 4 as I think most users would expect "-l" to be a shortcut for "--list" particularly given the current situation that "git branch -l" lists all the branch names. That said, I would not mind considering 3 if 4 has more bad consequences than the good it does (but I heavily doubt it ;-) ). I don't consider 1 to be an option ;-) -- Kaartic
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
