From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jonathan Nieder Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] branch: suggest how to undo a --set-upstream when given one branch Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2012 18:00:14 -0500 Message-ID: <20120710230014.GA20873@burratino> References: <1341939181-8962-1-git-send-email-cmn@elego.de> <1341939181-8962-3-git-send-email-cmn@elego.de> <20120710192408.GF8439@burratino> <7vliirgrun.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Carlos =?utf-8?Q?Mart=C3=ADn?= Nieto , git@vger.kernel.org, Matthieu Moy To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Jul 11 01:00:32 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1SojPx-00011h-5P for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Wed, 11 Jul 2012 01:00:29 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754692Ab2GJXAY (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Jul 2012 19:00:24 -0400 Received: from mail-yx0-f174.google.com ([209.85.213.174]:45058 "EHLO mail-yx0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753978Ab2GJXAX (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Jul 2012 19:00:23 -0400 Received: by yenl2 with SMTP id l2so624937yen.19 for ; Tue, 10 Jul 2012 16:00:23 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=bgO/fBJi/nAT4Aod1a5C4Vj6xkCgkSbi9xAEMmUQ0x8=; b=WUYfkeHmXCI6bgMFM84awQIPLsYUjE0QtiHM/HuTrInSb4fnfHBkWkKwafKE1IjatN 9QoU4z0w8YHjqpwVujuuvmOe2k8qT2hN0Pe7+9ocMGBx/onG6B8FT/hYOtpQKwsrtI3c POoqX7H5Oo4TKwGsISqWC2vqQCpx/470fiQ83I7h+Vyn63HTghRo790d4UE17NZWF8lm /BPlHWD71FwvC7KaFv9gigCwBkxkQlQXlYU8Bx6W78nO1FPnuIFSsKL5DJLwmBEhOOqu sKIhrP+QQLcyoyuTZ5SHUeLog7ocncb13/5/nfpzRpjrz85jXM8y+ajbG4VsvxFNvqUi lo3w== Received: by 10.50.217.163 with SMTP id oz3mr13033271igc.5.1341961222690; Tue, 10 Jul 2012 16:00:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from burratino (cl-1372.chi-02.us.sixxs.net. [2001:4978:f:55b::2]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id s4sm12849173igb.1.2012.07.10.16.00.21 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 10 Jul 2012 16:00:22 -0700 (PDT) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <7vliirgrun.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Junio C Hamano wrote: > I think it > is better to leave them emitted unconditionally to the standard > error stream, in order to train users away from using the old option > that has its arguments wrong (the option does not take an argument > it should, and makes the command line to look as if it takes two > branch arguments in the wrong order). I thought we already discussed that that is a side-issue? The option is a mode option for the command, like "-m", "-d", or "--edit-description". I genuinely don't think the order of options it takes is counter-intuitive. The second argument defaulting to HEAD and the behavior of creating the branch named by the first argument when it does not exist are quite counter-intuitive. Transitioning to a different argument order seems like it would just make the command more complicated. After the transition, there are two options to explain, and during the transition, it is easy to make scripts with gratuitous incompatibilities that won't work on older systems. Where is my thinking going wrong? Jonathan