> On May 28, 2020, at 3:29 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > >> Kenneth Lorber <keni@xxxxxxx> writes: >> >>> +Git uses identifiers in a number of different namespaces: >>> + >>> +* environment variables >>> +* files in $GIT_DIR >>> +* files in the working trees >>> +* config sections >>> +* hooks >>> +* attributes >> >> The names of the subcommands "git" can spawn is a shared resource. >> You can install "git-imerge" program in one of the directories on >> your $PATH and say "git imerge" to invoke the program. >> >> Two third-party developers may have to coordinate to avoid giving >> the same name to their totally-unrelated tools, if they hope that >> both of their tools to be useful in the larger Git ecosystem. > > Also names of worktrees that are attached to a single repository. > If a third-party tool wants to make it "easy" for its users by > automatically taking a name to do its job (instead of forcing the > users to come up with a name and giving it to the tool), the name > must be chosen in such a way that it does not collide names in use > and names the user (or other third-party tools) will pick in the > future. One more, but only as an issue to be documented - you don't need to convince me that trying to handle this should simply be declared "left as an exercise for the reader" and that's extensions that require being compiled in to git (so file names, global variables, functions, test names, etc). I'd propose "Do something similar to the above or ask for help on the list" if that's acceptable (where "above" is whatever the current proposal turns into). > > I (or others) may come up with other things that must be named and > name collisions must be avoided. Even though I already said that I > didn't think the "suggestions to avoid name collisions" given by the > RFC PATCH are well done, I do think it is worth being aware of the > problem space, and enumerating what kind of names are shared and > limited resource is the first step to become so. Each message seems less enthusiastic than the last. I'm not sure I see any point in creating a v3 until I have time and inspiration to write something significantly different. > > Thanks. You're welcome. PS - nothing to reply to in the next 2 messages from you. Saved them for v3.
