[RFC] Do we still need the git command?

[RFC] Do we still need the git command?

[Robert Watson]

Hello,

The function of the git command:

(1) As an alias for git-command.  After the recent big tool rename,
all "git                         command" can be replaced by
"git-command".
(2) Report version number.  This can be solved by a git-version
command.                             (3) List interesting commands. 
This can be taken care by man git(7) or TAB-TAB.  Or, add a git-help
command to list only interesting commands.

How about get rid of the git command all together?

Cons:
(1) Another change of the user interface;
(2) Different style from CVS/SVN.

Pros:
(1) Consistency.  There is only one way to do it.  People won't be
wondering what's the difference between "git-diff" and "git diff".
(2) Performance.  One less shell script to parse and one less exec system call.
(3) TAB completion.  git-whatchanged and other long commands are
easier to type with TAB completion.  TAB-TAB also shows you all
available commands.
(4) Do not conflict with GNU Interactive Tools.  Make the life of
Debian people easier.

What do you think?

Robertoo

Re: [RFC] Do we still need the git command?

[Martin Langhoff]

On 9/23/05, Robert Watson <robert.oo.watson@gmail.com> wrote:
> (2) Different style from CVS/SVN.

That is a plus in my book -- CVS implemented an awful UI, and everyone
else followed. CVS did make use if it in that it discriminated options
to the cvs utility from command options.

> Pros:
> (4) Do not conflict with GNU Interactive Tools.  Make the life of
> Debian people easier.

+1! Anything to avoid yet another flamewar in debian-devel ;-) and it
also shows some good manners towards a (mostly forgotten) but good
project. The whole name conflict prompted me to install the GNU
Interactive Tools and run it for a couple of days. Nifty little
"midnight-commander" style utility.

cheers,


martin

Re: [RFC] Do we still need the git command?

[Sebastian Kuzminsky]

Martin Langhoff <martin.langhoff@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Pros:
> > (4) Do not conflict with GNU Interactive Tools.  Make the life of
> > Debian people easier.
> 
> +1! Anything to avoid yet another flamewar in debian-devel ;-) and it
> also shows some good manners towards a (mostly forgotten) but good
> project. The whole name conflict prompted me to install the GNU
> Interactive Tools and run it for a couple of days. Nifty little
> "midnight-commander" style utility.

I've been talking with the Debian maintainer of GNU Interactive Tools
about this.  He says he's agreed with his upstream maintainer to change
the name of their git.  I dont know if he means they'll change their
name in the upstream package or just in the Debian package.  I offered
to do the work for them and do an NMU, but then I havent heard from them
for about 2 weeks, so I'm not sure what their status is.

"Ha ha, we sure bullied them into doing it our way."


-- 
Sebastian Kuzminsky