Re: [RFC/PATCH 2/2] git-svn: rename 'commit' command to 'set-tree'

2 messages, 2 authors, 2016-08-11 · open the first message on its own page

Re: [RFC/PATCH 2/2] git-svn: rename 'commit' command to 'set-tree'

From: Junio C Hamano <hidden>
Date: 2016-08-11 20:07:09

Eric Wong [off-list ref] writes:
'set-tree' probably accurately describes what the command
formerly known as 'commit' does.

I'm not entirely sure that 'dcommit' should be renamed to 'commit'
just yet...  Perhaps 'push' or 'push-changes'?
I think Pasky did such a three-way rename to avoid breaking
people's fingers.  I thought it was a reasonable transition
strategy, but some people might say its only effect was to break
people's fingers not just once but twice, so Pasky himself
and/or Cogito users may have some input on this.

We are talking about major UI change between 1.4 series and
v1.5.0 on the core Porcelain-ish side, so if you feel confident
that things would settle down in a month or so in the git-svn
front, it may be a good idea to roll sweeping changes into the
same timeframe.

Re: [RFC/PATCH 2/2] git-svn: rename 'commit' command to 'set-tree'

From: Eric Wong <hidden>
Date: 2016-08-11 19:37:01

Junio C Hamano [off-list ref] wrote:
Eric Wong [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
'set-tree' probably accurately describes what the command
formerly known as 'commit' does.

I'm not entirely sure that 'dcommit' should be renamed to 'commit'
just yet...  Perhaps 'push' or 'push-changes'?
I think Pasky did such a three-way rename to avoid breaking
people's fingers.  I thought it was a reasonable transition
strategy, but some people might say its only effect was to break
people's fingers not just once but twice, so Pasky himself
and/or Cogito users may have some input on this.
Good point about breaking fingers twice.  I don't think 'commit'
accurately describes any current operation that git-svn does; so the
command can probably go away safely.  I'm guessing that something along
the lines of 'push' is probably a better way to describe 'dcommit'.
We are talking about major UI change between 1.4 series and
v1.5.0 on the core Porcelain-ish side, so if you feel confident
that things would settle down in a month or so in the git-svn
front, it may be a good idea to roll sweeping changes into the
same timeframe.
I plan on supporting remotes in the config file; and adding support for
svn in git-fetch (wrapping git-svn multi-fetch, which should get faster
by then)

-- 
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help