Re: git annoyances

[Jean-Christian de Rivaz <jc@eclis.ch>]

Junio C Hamano a écrit :
> That made us allowing the users to type "git pull" and "git fetch" without
> parameters.  This is generally a good thing: shorter to type for doing
> common things is always good, as long as the user knows what he is doing.
> 
> But at the same time, this allowed docs and cheat-sheets that mention only
> the form without parameters and not the normative "repository refspec"
> form.  This dumbed down the users not understand that in that context
> fetch (and pull, which is a fetch followed by a merge) is always happening
> against a single branch of single remote repository, the way to name
> remote repository and its branch(es) is to give them as separate
> parameters, and their not typing the pair explicitly is a mere convenience
> feature.  This particular aspect of the shorthand is actually very bad.
> It makes the mental model fuzzy, and hiding important rules of how the
> world works from new people would lead them to unnecessary confusion.  In
> short, we made it harder for the new people to "get" it.

A possible way it to, by default, make git print the full form of the 
command when a short form is used. So the user see the concept without 
having to read the documentation and learn it gradually. I personally 
like tools that act this way. It permit to make a basic and easy 
tutorial with short commands that let know the general concept and show 
the full potential of the tool.

A "short form" flag in a user (not repository) configuration file should 
allow to suppress the long form printout for the comfort of the users 
that don't want it.

--
Jean-Christian de Rivaz