git.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>
To: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Cc: Steven Grimm <koreth@midwinter.com>,
	Pierre Habouzit <madcoder@debian.org>,
	git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] git-revert is one of the most misunderstood command in git, help users out.
Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2007 23:40:46 +0000 (GMT)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0711052325090.4362@racer.site> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7vlk9cmiyq.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org>

Hi,

On Mon, 5 Nov 2007, Junio C Hamano wrote:

> Steven Grimm <koreth@midwinter.com> writes:
> 
> > But that suggested command is not going to convince anyone they were
> > wrong about git being hard to learn. I wonder if instead of saying, "I
> > know what you meant, but I'm going to make you type a different
> > command," we should make git revert just do what the user meant.
> >
> > There is already precedent for that kind of mixed-mode UI:
> >
> > git checkout my-branch
> > vs.
> > git checkout my/source/file.c
> 
> That's an example of mixed-mode UI, but what you are suggesting is quite 
> different, isn't it?
> 
> There is no other officially supported single-command-way to
> checkout paths out of the index.

Okay, let's step back a bit.

We taught "git show" to show other objects than commits, by doing the 
obvious things.  So there _is_ a precendent to changing a commands 
behaviour to accept more than just commits.  And there was already another 
command for the same purpose, cat-file, which was never meant as 
porcelain however.

Now, what does "revert" _mean_?  At the moment, it wants a commit, and 
will undo the changes that commit introduced, _and commits it_ (asking 
for a message).

What would I expect "git revert -- file" to do?  It would undo the changes 
to that file -- and since no commit was specified, I would expect it to 
look at the changes against the index.  (IOW exactly what Steven 
proposed.)

To continue the analogy, it would have to commit the undoing of the 
change.  But since that change never was committed, I think it is more 
natural to _not_ commit it.

In the same way, I would expect "git revert <commit> -- file" to undo the 
changes in that commit to _that_ file (something like "git merge-file 
file <commit>:file <commit>^:file"), but this time commit it, since it 
was committed at one stage.

IMHO this would be a consistent behaviour _and_ help new git users.

After all, we are not Python, supposedly narrowing users down to 
one-way-to-do-things only.

Ciao,
Dscho

  reply	other threads:[~2007-11-05 23:41 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 39+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-11-05 19:01 [PATCH] git-revert is one of the most misunderstood command in git, help users out Pierre Habouzit
2007-11-05 19:04 ` Pierre Habouzit
2007-11-05 19:05   ` J. Bruce Fields
2007-11-05 19:10     ` Pierre Habouzit
2007-11-05 19:28 ` Steven Grimm
2007-11-05 19:50   ` Pierre Habouzit
2007-11-05 21:54   ` Alejandro Martinez Ruiz
2007-11-05 22:06     ` David Kastrup
2007-11-05 23:41       ` Alejandro Martinez Ruiz
2007-11-05 22:21   ` Junio C Hamano
2007-11-05 23:40     ` Johannes Schindelin [this message]
2007-11-06  0:08       ` Pierre Habouzit
2007-11-06  2:51       ` Junio C Hamano
2007-11-06  3:18         ` Johannes Schindelin
2007-11-06  4:54           ` Junio C Hamano
2007-11-06  8:49             ` Pierre Habouzit
2007-11-06  9:29               ` Mike Hommey
2007-11-06  9:37                 ` Pierre Habouzit
2007-11-06 12:32             ` Johannes Schindelin
2007-11-06 18:06               ` Junio C Hamano
2007-11-06 18:27                 ` Johannes Schindelin
2007-11-06 19:39                   ` Pierre Habouzit
2007-11-06 19:42                     ` Junio C Hamano
2007-11-06 22:21                       ` Johannes Schindelin
2007-11-06 20:06               ` Robin Rosenberg
2007-11-06 20:13                 ` Mike Hommey
2007-11-06 21:21                   ` Robin Rosenberg
2007-11-06 22:25                     ` Johannes Schindelin
2007-11-07  8:16                       ` Mike Hommey
2007-11-07 11:08                         ` Johannes Schindelin
2007-11-07 19:32                           ` Robin Rosenberg
2007-11-07 20:01                             ` Jakub Narebski
2007-11-07  9:03                       ` David Kastrup
2007-11-06 11:08         ` Junio C Hamano
2007-11-06 11:51           ` Johannes Sixt
2007-11-06 12:16             ` Johannes Schindelin
2007-11-06 12:25           ` Johannes Schindelin
2007-11-06 12:48             ` Pierre Habouzit
2007-11-06 17:43               ` Wincent Colaiuta

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=Pine.LNX.4.64.0711052325090.4362@racer.site \
    --to=johannes.schindelin@gmx.de \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=gitster@pobox.com \
    --cc=koreth@midwinter.com \
    --cc=madcoder@debian.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).