From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jan =?UTF-8?B?S3LDvGdlcg==?= Subject: Re: DWIM "git checkout frotz" to "git checkout -b frotz origin/frotz" Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2010 22:11:34 +0200 Message-ID: <20100607221134.002ae81a@jk.gs> References: <20100605110930.GA10526@localhost> <20100605135811.GA14862@localhost> <20100606161805.GA6239@coredump.intra.peff.net> <20100606165554.GB10104@localhost> <20100606173233.GA11041@localhost> <20100607182956.GA17343@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Jacob Helwig , Jeff King , Sverre Rabbelier , git@vger.kernel.org, Peter Rabbitson To: Clemens Buchacher X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Jun 07 22:11:51 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 1OLifj-0008Rc-Ik for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Mon, 07 Jun 2010 22:11:47 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754360Ab0FGULm (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Jun 2010 16:11:42 -0400 Received: from zoidberg.org ([88.198.6.61]:53413 "EHLO cthulhu.zoidberg.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753678Ab0FGULm (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Jun 2010 16:11:42 -0400 Received: from jk.gs (xdsl-78-35-146-157.netcologne.de [::ffff:78.35.146.157]) (AUTH: LOGIN jast, SSL: TLSv1/SSLv3,128bits,AES128-SHA) by cthulhu.zoidberg.org with esmtp; Mon, 07 Jun 2010 22:11:39 +0200 id 00404075.4C0D527B.00004A7E In-Reply-To: <20100607182956.GA17343@localhost> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.6 (GTK+ 2.20.1; i486-pc-linux-gnu) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Clemens Buchacher wrote: > > Other than "unexpected success", how is the DWIM behavior confusing, > > given that it says exactly what it's doing when the DWIM behavior is > > invoked? I'm still not clear what the confusion you're referring to > > is on this one. > > I am telling git to checkout a branch. Instead it creates a branch. > That is what is confusing to me. Until I found the commit that > introduced it, I was sure it must be a bug. I usually see the opposite kind of confusion on #git: someone cloned a repository and wants to work on one of the branches. After all, we tell everyone that clone copies all the history. So they type "git checkout "... and they get a weird error (what's a pathspec, anyway?). OMGWTFBBQ! Not knowing what's going on, they drop by in #git and hear they need to type something much less straightforward than "git checkout ". They don't really know why, so they probably assume it's because git is just so damn complicated and overengineered. I have yet to see any newish users complain about the new syntax, by the way. You don't qualify, sorry. ;)