Re: What's in git.git (stable)

Hi,

On Thu, 14 Dec 2006, Andy Parkins wrote:

On Thursday 2006 December 14 00:22, Johannes Schindelin wrote:

quoted

quoted

 * git-revert should be called git-invert.  It doesn't remove a change
   from history, it simply applies another commit that does the
   opposite of whatever commit you are "revert"ing.  That's an inversion.

No. An inversion is the _opposite_. Not an undo.

That's what I'm saying, we are applying the opposite of the given commit 
- that commit is being inverted and applied again.

Ahh! I get what you are thinking. I was talking about reverting a change 
from the _content's viewpoint_. I _never_ want to revert history (I am no 
politician, you know?)

quoted

newbie cannot, and does not want to, understand exactly what is going 
on.

"newbie" doesn't mean "idiot".  Everybody wants to understand what is 
going on.

I heartly disagree. I saw so many faces _begging_ me to just say _what_ to 
do, not _why_, and quickly, please.

quoted

So, think of it as our response to Windows' non-progress-bar: when you 
start up Windows, there is a progress-bar, except that it does not 
show progress, but a Knight Rider like movement, only indicating that 
it does something.

Given the choice between nothing and a non-progress "doing something" 
bar, I would of course pick the "doing something" bar.  However, given 
the choice between a "doing something" bar and a progress bar, I'd 
rather have the progress bar.

If I have the choice between a "doing something" bar and a Windows 
Explorer "14 seconds left" bar showing the same message for two minutes, 
I'd rather have a Mars bar ;-)

Ciao,
Dscho