From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Miles Bader Subject: Re: What's cooking in git.git (Dec 2010, #01; Sat, 4) Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2010 17:13:46 +0900 Message-ID: References: <7v62v8ufyl.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <20101206082948.1403cc5a@chalon.bertin.fr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Cc: gitster@pobox.com, git list To: Yann Dirson X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Dec 06 09:14:17 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PPWD9-00020I-4X for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Mon, 06 Dec 2010 09:14:15 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751276Ab0LFIOJ (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Dec 2010 03:14:09 -0500 Received: from TYO202.gate.nec.co.jp ([202.32.8.206]:44838 "EHLO tyo202.gate.nec.co.jp" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750836Ab0LFIOI (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Dec 2010 03:14:08 -0500 Received: from mailgate3.nec.co.jp ([10.7.69.192]) by tyo202.gate.nec.co.jp (8.13.8/8.13.4) with ESMTP id oB68DnKV005974; Mon, 6 Dec 2010 17:13:49 +0900 (JST) Received: (from root@localhost) by mailgate3.nec.co.jp (8.11.7/3.7W-MAILGATE-NEC) id oB68Dlq25891; Mon, 6 Dec 2010 17:13:47 +0900 (JST) Received: from relay31.aps.necel.com ([10.29.19.54]) by vgate02.nec.co.jp (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id oB67vMbC013827; Mon, 6 Dec 2010 17:13:47 +0900 (JST) Received: from relay41.aps.necel.com ([10.29.19.103] [10.29.19.103]) by relay31.aps.necel.com with ESMTP; Mon, 6 Dec 2010 17:13:47 +0900 Received: from dhlpc061 ([10.114.98.29] [10.114.98.29]) by relay41.aps.necel.com with ESMTP; Mon, 6 Dec 2010 17:13:47 +0900 Received: by dhlpc061 (Postfix, from userid 31295) id B5F9252E224; Mon, 6 Dec 2010 17:13:46 +0900 (JST) System-Type: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu Blat: Foop In-Reply-To: <20101206082948.1403cc5a@chalon.bertin.fr> (Yann Dirson's message of "Mon, 06 Dec 2010 08:29:48 +0100") Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Yann Dirson writes: > But then, why not simply use --find-renames (since --detect-renames has > luckily not been released ontl the masses yet), and avoid making similar-usage > opts dissimilar and then adding a synonym just to make them similar the other > way ? "Find" and "detect" have different nuances. "Detect" sounds somewhat passive/minor, so "detect renames" makes it more clear that renames are detected _in addition_ to normal processing. "Find," by contrast, is active/major, so "find renames" makes it sounds like an action to be performed _instead_ of some normal processing. -Miles -- 97% of everything is grunge