Dragan Simic <dsimic@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > Regarding the branch copy and rename operations and their argument > names, perhaps the following would be a good choice: > > --copy [<branch>] <destination> > --move [<branch>] <destination> > > It would clearly reflect the nature of the performed operations, while > still using "<branch>" consistently, this time to refer to the source > branch. Using "<destination>" to select the destination name should > be pretty much self-descriptive, if you agree. Awful. While I was skimming the messages without reading the Subject line (hence without realizing that this is about improving the existing documentation and not adding new features), I thought that these two are about moving branch to a remote repository that is named with <destination>. My advice would be to stick to <old> vs <new> that contrasts well. Thanks.
