Re: git-branch -m interprets first argument differently when two are supplied

Johannes Schindelin wrote:

Hi,

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008, Brandon Casey wrote:

quoted

Johannes Sixt wrote:

quoted

Brandon Casey schrieb:

quoted

The first non-option argument is interpreted differently depending on
whether one argument or two arguments have been supplied.

	git-branch -m [<oldbranch>] <newbranch>

Has anyone considered whether this is inconsistent with how other
commands operate?

Funny, I fell into this trap just yesterday and accidentally renamed
my master branch to something else. IMO git-branch -m should take two
arguments. Full stop.

Actually, I think the single argument case is unambiguous and I would
rather not give it up.

It's the two argument case that both expects its arguments in a 
different order than other commands _and_ is dangerous in the case of 
-M.

The order was specifically requested, as "mv" also has that order.

Did you even read the original message? You point this out like it hasn't
already been mentioned.

The _point_ is that the order is _different_ than the order that other _git_
commands use. I give more weight to the relationship with other git commands
than to the relationship between the '-M' option and the 'mv' command. A
subcommand named 'mv' could have been used if a strong relationship was
supposed to be implied, something like 'git-branch mv <src> <dst>'. I'm not
sure the single argument case would have retained its intuitiveness in this case.

And "-M" is always dangerous.

Don't use it, if you don't know what you're
doing.

Gee, thanks for the advice.

-brandon