Re: possible usability issue in rebase -i?

[Erik Faye-Lund <kusmabite@googlemail.com>]

On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 3:34 PM, Baz <brian.ewins@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2009/10/28 Erik Faye-Lund <kusmabite@googlemail.com>:
>> I'm not sure I follow - aren't dashless options, uhm, dashless? Do you
>> mean to use the long-form instead of the short-form? I'll assume
>> that's what you mean for now, since you changed "-i" to "--interactive
>> | -i".
>
> No, I just meant 'git rebase' not 'git-rebase'. Sorry, I changed a
> couple of things at once.

Ah, didn't notice that one. I completely agree with you on this.

> tend to emit one-liners. As for calling out 'interactive', at the
> other extreme its not clear to me why we mention '-i' separately from
> '[options]' at all. rebase is already pretty inconsistent here, giving
> short or long usage messages depending on whether you passed '-i'. But
> I'll take comments on this when I submit the patch, I've no strong
> feelings on it.

It's a simple reason why the output is different - this is the usage
for "git rebase -i" (hence it is in git-rebase--interactive.sh). I
guess this distinction would be slightly clearer if we removed the
brackets from the usage like this:

-git-rebase [-i] [whatever]
+git-rebase -i [whatever]


-- 
Erik "kusma" Faye-Lund