Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Patrick Steinhardt <ps@xxxxxx> writes:
>
>> The git-checkout(1) command is seen by many as hard to understand
>> because it connects two somewhat unrelated features: switching between
>> branches and restoring worktree files from arbitrary revisions. In 2019,
>> we thus implemented two new commands git-switch(1) and git-restore(1) to
>> split out these separate concerns into standalone functions.
>>
>> This "replacement" of git-checkout(1) has repeatedly triggered concerns
>> for our userbase that git-checkout(1) will eventually go away. This is
>> not the case though: the use of that command is still widespread, and it
>> is not expected that this will change anytime soon.
>>
>> Document that neither of these commands will not go away anytime soon.
>
> "neither" -> "none"? It is accepted to use neither to pick among
> three things these days, but the latter is clearer.
I think 'will not' should lose the 'not' as well:
Document that neither|none of these commands will go
away anytime soon.
Alternately, the neither/none question could be resolved by
dropping it entirely:
Document that these commands will not go away anytime
soon.
I'm not sure that's better; it leaves ambiguity about what
"these commands" includes.
Maybe:
Document that all three commands will remain for the
foreseeable future.
But after writing all that, I only just noticed this is in
the commit message. And while that's important, the more
important content of the change itself uses clear language
to say all three commands will stay. :)
--
Todd
