Re: Deprecate git-fetch-pack?

[Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>]

Theodore Tso <tytso@mit.edu> writes:

> On Sun, Nov 11, 2007 at 01:16:09PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> writes:
>> > This should be a non-issue.  We really should start deprecating 
>> > "git-<command>" in favour of "git <command>" for real.
>> >
>> > New users should not even be told that this is correct usage.
>> 
>> If you can write "git-commit" and "git commit" interchangeably
>> while you cannot say "git-cat-file" and are forced to say "git
>> cat-file", I suspect that would lead to a great confusion and
>> unhappy users.
>
> One of the reasons why I use git-diff and git-commit and in particular
> "git-rebase --interactive master" very often is that it allows my
> shell's bang completion to work.  (i.e., "!git-rebase").  If we tell
> people they can not use "git-rebase", and must instead use "git
> rebase" instead, I would consider that pretty annoying/obnoxious.

Oh, of course.

But my impression was that Johannes was talking about
deprecating git-<foo> form only for plumbing, so that the users
will only see git-<foo> for the Porcelain.  That would not break
your bang completion for the porcelain commands.

If Johannes was talking about deprecating all git-<foo> form,
then that would indeed break your bang completion, but it has
conceptually a much bigger problem.  The topic was about fixing
"a new user sees too many git commands and gets scared" problem.
Deprecaing all git-<foo> form just replaces the problem with "a
new user sees too many git subcommands and gets scared" problem,
without solving anything.