Re: [PATCH] branch: rework the descriptions of rename and copy operations

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



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.




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux