Re: [PATCH v3 0/3] branch: let --delete-merged find squash merged branches

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

Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes:

> I would avoid a negative-sounding word like "irrelevant".  Your work
> is almost always relevant, at least to you.
>
> The purpose of the new feature is to find branches that the user no
> longer needs to keep because they have been practically merged.
> Perhaps --delete-integrated?  I do not know.  The naming matters,
> and I hope somebody watching from the sidelines can suggest a better
> alternative.
>
> For lack of a better alternative that I can suggest, I will use
> "--delete-foo" for the remainder of this message.

Here is a short list of candidates for "foo" I came up with.

    merged
    integrated
    subsumed
    absorbed
    included
    done

Reusing the existing --delete-merged option by extending it as
--delete-merged[=<level>] is somewhat tempting.  However, we frown
upon options with optional values because our options by default
allow option-arguments to be given as separate arguments.  If we
can, I would prefer to avoid doing so.

Our documentation uses "integrated" to describe practically merging
your work upstream, whether by merging, rebasing, or squash-merging.
However, that word is a tad too long.  "subsumed", "absorbed", and
"included" are shorter alternatives, but none of them is familiar
in our parlance.

The word "done" may be a direct match to the mindset of our users.
Once your branch is integrated upstream and you no longer need to
keep pushing for its inclusion, you are "done" with it.

I dunno.  I hope others will suggest something much better than any
of the above ;-)