Martin wrote: > On 12/07/2021 18:24, Felipe Contreras wrote: > > Sergey Organov wrote: > > Even standardizing `git branch` would be an almost-impossible task, even > > if we manage to convince others. `git new branch` even more impossible. > > > > Not sure but from the glance at hg that I took, they seem to use the > plural for nouns. > > So then we could have > > git branch <new-branch-name> > > git branches new // long version > git branches list > git branches delete > .... > > However, standardizing to a fixed verb/noun rule will still be more than > a challenge. > > The above would as guildeline be > > git verb > or > git plural-noun verb I don't see what's wrong with considering the second form a subcommand: git $subcommand $verb Like `git bisect start`. That way you could consider `branches` to be a subcommand, it doesn't need to be a plural noun. > Yet try to do that with > git status > git log > > I don't see how a better alternative for those can be found. One that > actually is accepted because it's better, not just because it follows a > rule. > > status, is not a verb > log is the wrong verb, or again a noun. If `git branch` is a shorthand for `git branches new`, the you could consider `git status` to be the a shortcut for `git status show`, but since there's no other action to be done with the status subcommand, then it's always implied. -- Felipe Contreras
