From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Johannes Schindelin Subject: Re: [PATCH,RFC 1/2] Make the list of common commands more exclusive Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2007 12:23:38 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: References: <20071111235819.GB7392@thunk.org> <1194829077-14320-1-git-send-email-tytso@mit.edu> <7vzlxk8apz.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> <20071112062222.GA17462@thunk.org> <7vhcjr53hp.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> <20071112102412.GA24803@glandium.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: Junio C Hamano , Theodore Tso , Git Mailing List To: Mike Hommey X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Nov 12 13:24:18 2007 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 1IrYKn-00038n-Q3 for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Mon, 12 Nov 2007 13:24:10 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758250AbXKLMXy (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Nov 2007 07:23:54 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1758202AbXKLMXy (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Nov 2007 07:23:54 -0500 Received: from mail.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20]:41325 "HELO mail.gmx.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1753144AbXKLMXx (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Nov 2007 07:23:53 -0500 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 12 Nov 2007 12:23:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (EHLO [138.251.11.74]) [138.251.11.74] by mail.gmx.net (mp034) with SMTP; 12 Nov 2007 13:23:52 +0100 X-Authenticated: #1490710 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1+Qk9pUlymQb//w9b4IZmz+DyBtVVf/1bc4eYdYMx IdWqiFRjur7tYc X-X-Sender: gene099@racer.site In-Reply-To: <20071112102412.GA24803@glandium.org> X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Hi, On Mon, 12 Nov 2007, Mike Hommey wrote: > On Sun, Nov 11, 2007 at 11:26:10PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > > My mental model for git newbies is that they would probably be pulling > > > from upstream repositories (so I was tempted to remove git-init from > > > the common commands list), but they would rarely be cherry-picking or > > > reverting other people's changes. > > > > I'd agree with that, but reverting and cherry-picking would also > > be done on the commits the user builds on top of other people's > > changes. > > On the other hand, cherry-picking and reverting are just the same thing, > except one applies a reversed patch. Wouldn't it make sense to merge > these two in one command ? Technically, they are. That's why both of them live in builtin-revert.c. But conceptually, they are not. At least _I_ found it hard at first, to accept that reverting a patch really was a reverse cherry-picking. Ciao, Dscho