From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: DWIM "git checkout frotz" to "git checkout -b frotz origin/frotz" Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2010 12:18:05 -0400 Message-ID: <20100606161805.GA6239@coredump.intra.peff.net> References: <20100605110930.GA10526@localhost> <20100605135811.GA14862@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: Clemens Buchacher , git@vger.kernel.org, Peter Rabbitson To: Sverre Rabbelier X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sun Jun 06 18:18:19 2010 connect(): No such file or directory Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OLIYC-0008TZ-AC for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Sun, 06 Jun 2010 18:18:16 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S934112Ab0FFQSL (ORCPT ); Sun, 6 Jun 2010 12:18:11 -0400 Received: from peff.net ([208.65.91.99]:34404 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932198Ab0FFQSK (ORCPT ); Sun, 6 Jun 2010 12:18:10 -0400 Received: (qmail 8527 invoked by uid 107); 6 Jun 2010 16:18:16 -0000 Received: from coredump.intra.peff.net (HELO coredump.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.2) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.40) with (AES128-SHA encrypted) SMTP; Sun, 06 Jun 2010 12:18:16 -0400 Received: by coredump.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Sun, 06 Jun 2010 12:18:05 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Sat, Jun 05, 2010 at 04:03:30PM +0200, Sverre Rabbelier wrote: > On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 15:58, Clemens Buchacher wrote: > > Well, I just noticed this by accident, it is not documented > > anywhere, and you cannot expected me to know everything that is > > going on on the list. Should I not offer my opinion because of > > that? > > No, I just meant that because you are late to the party you should > first read the original thread, and then perhaps summarize it, like > you have done below. Moreover, the burden for arguing against it is a little higher. It is no longer "I think this is a bad idea" but "I think this is a bad idea, and it is so bad that it is worth changing behavior that users may have become accustomed to". > > Well, I also think it is a bad idea, and I am not surprised to find > > users confused by it. > > I think it was an idea from the last mentor summit, Peff? No, I complained about it at the mentor summit, but the idea predates it. I think all of the relevant discussion is on the list. -Peff