From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCH] Replace "git-" with "git " in *.[ch] comments and notifications Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2008 19:12:18 -0700 Message-ID: <7vr6872qv1.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <20080829234751.GA2396@zakalwe.fi> <7vvdxj2ucl.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> <20080830011509.GA16289@zakalwe.fi> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Heikki Orsila , git@vger.kernel.org To: Heikki Orsila X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sat Aug 30 04:13:32 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1KZFxz-0001UW-A5 for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Sat, 30 Aug 2008 04:13:31 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754146AbYH3CM0 (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Aug 2008 22:12:26 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753833AbYH3CM0 (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Aug 2008 22:12:26 -0400 Received: from a-sasl-fastnet.sasl.smtp.pobox.com ([207.106.133.19]:60754 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753423AbYH3CMZ (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Aug 2008 22:12:25 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-sasl-fastnet.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C19C859286; Fri, 29 Aug 2008 22:12:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pobox.com (ip68-225-240-211.oc.oc.cox.net [68.225.240.211]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by a-sasl-fastnet.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EC26359285; Fri, 29 Aug 2008 22:12:20 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <20080830011509.GA16289@zakalwe.fi> (Heikki Orsila's message of "Sat, 30 Aug 2008 04:15:09 +0300") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 16263BB8-7639-11DD-AFA6-9EE598D589B0-77302942!a-sasl-fastnet.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Heikki Orsila writes: > On Fri, Aug 29, 2008 at 05:56:58PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > ... >> I do not think a single patch with the above hunk (which I think is a >> mistake) and other bits that are obviously good (e.g. the first hunk to >> builtin-apply.c we see below) is reviewable, but I cannot think of a >> better alterantive. Sigh... > ... >> I did not look at the rest. > > Is the concept OK for this change? I can submit another patch. By "concept" if you mean the goal to stop implying to the end users as if it is a good practice to type (either from the command line or in their scripts) "git-foo" dashed form, the goal is obviously good. I however am not sure if posting a single patch that is 1300 lines long would be the most effective way to achieve that goal. Splitting them into a handful batches, spread over a few weeks to give reviewers some breathing room, might make it more reviewable. I dunno. Let's see hands; how many of you on git mailing list are willing to review a re-rolled series, when Heikki posts one? How can we make it easier to apply "many eyeballs" to make the issue shallower? One thing you might be able to do would be to separate user visible strings and in-comment strings. Frankly, when a comment talks about a git subprogram, blindly replacing s/-/ / makes it _far worse_ and the resulting text is harder to read for git hackers (who are primary audiences of comments). E.g. taking one random example from your patch: diff --git a/builtin-init-db.c b/builtin-init-db.c index baf0d09..81aa822 100644 --- a/builtin-init-db.c +++ b/builtin-init-db.c @@ -37,7 +37,7 @@ static void copy_templates_1(char *path, int baselen, /* Note: if ".git/hooks" file exists in the repository being * re-initialized, /etc/core-git/templates/hooks/update would - * cause git-init to fail here. I think this is sane but + * cause git init to fail here. I think this is sane but * it means that the set of templates we ship by default, along * with the way the namespace under .git/ is organized, should * be really carefully chosen. I do not think this is an improvement. We are talking about a single subprogram, not what the user types from the command line. Either of these two would be easier to read: ... would cause git-init to fail here... ... would cause "init" to fail here... than: ... would cause git init to fail here... Among these three, I think the second one is the most readable. Perhaps dropping "git-" prefix when we are talking about a git subprogram, and quoting the word to make it stand out, could be a good approach , than replacing it with "git " prefix.