Philip Oakley <philipoakley@xxxxxxx> writes: >> But unlike "git foo --help", if the word that ought to name a >> subcommand instead names a known concept, e.g. "glossary", I do not >> think it is too bad if we DWIMmed what the user meant to say, >> i.e. turning "git glossary --help" into "git help glossary". >> > Given the earlier report that started the thread Duy linked, I guess > there will need to be a balance between the two expectations. > > The DWIMming may need to both report that it's not a command, but > then offer the concept guide as the primary target if correct, or > perhaps as one of the alternate "commands" if closely named to a guide > (e.g. revisions vs revision). The "or perhaps" part feels a bit overkill, but I do not mind seeing it if somebody does it cleanly and correctly ;-) > One of the issues back then was the lack of a complete list of > 'guides' to check against, so the badly spelt command logic wasn't > brought into play. Yeah, thanks for spelling it out; I think we are on the same page, having followed the same discussion in the archive, where we knew that a list of 'concepts-not-commands' would help the error message situation.
