Hello Junio,
On 2024-02-19 20:49, Junio C Hamano wrote:
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.
I appreciate the directness and honesty. How about using "<oldbranch>"
and "<newbranch>" instead, which, although more wordy, would be more
consistent with "<branch>" that's used in a number of other places?
Such consistency should make the users recognize the arguments better
at first glance.