From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: 'git config' vs 'git repo-config' Date: Sun, 04 Feb 2007 02:52:51 -0800 Message-ID: <7vmz3ury7w.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> References: <7v8xfetft6.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <7v4pq2tet5.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: "Marco Costalba" X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sun Feb 04 11:52:55 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1HDezP-0007XJ-3q for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Sun, 04 Feb 2007 11:52:55 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752278AbXBDKwx (ORCPT ); Sun, 4 Feb 2007 05:52:53 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752282AbXBDKwx (ORCPT ); Sun, 4 Feb 2007 05:52:53 -0500 Received: from fed1rmmtai14.cox.net ([68.230.241.45]:40045 "EHLO fed1rmmtao101.cox.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752278AbXBDKww (ORCPT ); Sun, 4 Feb 2007 05:52:52 -0500 Received: from fed1rmimpo01.cox.net ([70.169.32.71]) by fed1rmmtao101.cox.net (InterMail vM.7.05.02.00 201-2174-114-20060621) with ESMTP id <20070204105253.HFYH4586.fed1rmmtao101.cox.net@fed1rmimpo01.cox.net>; Sun, 4 Feb 2007 05:52:53 -0500 Received: from assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net ([68.5.247.80]) by fed1rmimpo01.cox.net with bizsmtp id KNsr1W00C1kojtg0000000; Sun, 04 Feb 2007 05:52:52 -0500 In-Reply-To: (Marco Costalba's message of "Sun, 4 Feb 2007 11:23:47 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: "Marco Costalba" writes: >> "Marco Costalba" writes: > > I plan to release a point release after git-1.5 is out, so I'm > wondering if renaming git-repo-config --> git-config also in qgit. > > BTW 'git-repo-config' seems to be currently used also by StGit It's really up to you and Catalin, but if you expect people might run with git 1.4.4, it would make more sense to stick with the tried-and-proven names and wait until you are reasonably sure that everybody you care about are running at least 1.5.0. The only reason the in-tree scripts git.git ships with use the new names is because they know they are part of a revision that has them.