From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Felipe Contreras Subject: Re: What is missing from Git v2.0 Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2014 02:19:04 -0500 Message-ID: <5358bae8ab550_1f7b143d31037@nysa.notmuch> References: <53557071.5040500@gmail.com> <5356c1a61f6d8_463e11ef310a5@nysa.notmuch> <20140422213039.GB21043@thunk.org> <53588713347b7_59ed83d308cf@nysa.notmuch> <53588f448d817_59ed83d3084e@nysa.notmuch> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: David Lang , Theodore Ts'o , Junio C Hamano , Sebastian Schuberth , Git Mailing List To: James Denholm , Felipe Contreras X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Apr 24 09:29:38 2014 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 1WdE6D-00076f-QV for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Thu, 24 Apr 2014 09:29:38 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751915AbaDXH3d (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Apr 2014 03:29:33 -0400 Received: from mail-oa0-f49.google.com ([209.85.219.49]:34028 "EHLO mail-oa0-f49.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751355AbaDXH3c (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Apr 2014 03:29:32 -0400 Received: by mail-oa0-f49.google.com with SMTP id o6so2203397oag.22 for ; Thu, 24 Apr 2014 00:29:31 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=date:from:to:cc:message-id:in-reply-to:references:subject :mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=JufGVL9B55TIzkRJE3G/YRyTJyk4oPm9JrExqTehtM4=; b=YQWEOsUkKQzowxx7bqvZY0FsL1r3rfloIc7ZiiWzHxoyU9Jxp4T4STZaqeqM0YBYsB 1QZkRJ+2woAblIPSDkpZyZQHtBa12VfEYtgvZdThjzNMaiidgjCBkClGzjht+JHzbbY/ Dkn7TaN1v7ptLD508g2w2iZjXREmMiUNWWgXgiNHxrP5HIdTYSGks/Jg/9CmKVyF+SBo 9+kEgTwlqj41MEJN/uc0UC3YncFU1i82jtSXW0dNV/WznnRtN0gjeZ6olCFwkwsRaCwr z3yAUBIyUoICrtpuAUXszNHonqWqyrdO3BTnCgCewmNA1Wq01pvrdjXMhJyWSwsKGvrW ctJA== X-Received: by 10.182.200.131 with SMTP id js3mr248550obc.0.1398324571796; Thu, 24 Apr 2014 00:29:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (189-211-224-40.static.axtel.net. [189.211.224.40]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id oz15sm14324923oeb.13.2014.04.24.00.29.29 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 24 Apr 2014 00:29:30 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: James Denholm wrote: > Felipe Contreras wrote: > >This is a false dichotomy; there aren't just two kinds > > of Git users. > > > > There is such a category of Git users who are not > > fresh-out-of-the-boat, yet not power users either. > > Oh, I didn't mean to suggest a dichotomy of any kind. However these are the > two groups (I suggest) are the most immediately relevant - one calls for > change, and the other would be negatively impacted. Nobody would be negatively impacted. Who would be impacted negatively by having default aliases? > > Unless the aliases are already there by default. > > Others, with knowledge far beyond mine, have pointed out the problems > with this. And I have showed they are not problems. > I'd suggest the argument most relevant to my own statements is how it impacts > the learning proccess, and makes it more likely that users will learn aliases > _as_ commands, which of course is incorrect and potentially harmful. That is an assumption. Why would a user think 'co' is a command? > > And if default aliases were such a bad idea, why do most (all?) version > > control systems out there have them? > > I'm so tempted just to sass and say that it's because they aren't git... > > But on a more serious note, a feature (any feature) being in one vcs doesn't > mean, by default, that it's right for git. How is Git different from any other version control systems? Commands are commands. > The status quo may be a mistake on the part of it's followers. Yes, it might, but it's not. > (And, historically, has been many times - for an transculturally-acceptable > example, consider the rejection of Galileo's astronomical research by the > Vatican of the time.) Yes, I'm perfecly aware that everybody _can_ be wrong, that doesn't mean they _are_. > Just because Mercurial et. all does something doesn't mean git needs to, or > even should. It needs objective consideration, not to just be ushered through > on the basis of tradition. Again, this is a red herring. Nobody argued that Git should do this because others are doing it. You failed to answer the question, so I'm asking it again: If default aliases were such a bad idea, why do most (all?) version control systems out there have them? Your answer seems to be along the lines of: they made a mistake and they are all wrong. Is it? But, surely if it's a mistake on their part you should be able to find people affected by this horrible error. This would validate the arguments that others have put forward; if we do X we will have problem Y. Well, other projects have done X, do they have problem Y? -- Felipe Contreras