From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com (pb-smtp1.pobox.com [64.147.108.70]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5080A1474AD for ; Thu, 15 Feb 2024 22:13:35 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=64.147.108.70 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1708035216; cv=none; b=FfW/nX1Y7qutu26YWMnKuo2uVFtuLQ1jthgoNfYJBIKLxuH/bMedv+gtkAhDgB2jcU20MbcmTlcb2QvBuEGKm0SkRTK1S9CEJb2cZGWAMwRneeM5XsgvzhFRSwovG4/GD/odYXkBjlq8WDEvxNFEkc/NaYltHEJL3lfKbWoTVcs= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1708035216; c=relaxed/simple; bh=7X3r35hVjKQOkv7PX632tAku9LrvV+CtjMy5KvOYagQ=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=SvJNpFjtFbdVXeXLmagmnZXLI9JtFdyPDFPzxBwWoKrtEsQW3NHtTGdoLzDj6aCaG5vC4U/gZwzXAgnelLWuY0m/Ygoc3URq1Cag/0ozkXM4F7bUKcR+s15OJ9IUQ/PXlD/rUFNTDFa/1lKaOxLSdsEtdFYYMDirKzbXnvuo7zE= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=pobox.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pobox.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b=ZPJWuzac; arc=none smtp.client-ip=64.147.108.70 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=pobox.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pobox.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b="ZPJWuzac" Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC0EF1DE6DA; Thu, 15 Feb 2024 17:13:33 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=sasl; bh=7X3r35hVjKQO kv7PX632tAku9LrvV+CtjMy5KvOYagQ=; b=ZPJWuzacAx5dDXuNgtyDHZAwAuZ6 u19L1i8mM6/qupaDOUSKZ6ytqlOFJEZHx5oIe2vziwcTDqRtOEJBC0Rij1d9Ul6I Hg+4RbXqDS4ODhArXfY/iRTUl6i9/HkhxAcUKglZo+kkWiBx7bUpnP2s7t9By9ti d3DMLxFWSm9hoAo= Received: from pb-smtp1.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B26621DE6D9; Thu, 15 Feb 2024 17:13:33 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.125.165.85]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2466D1DE6D8; Thu, 15 Feb 2024 17:13:33 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: =?utf-8?Q?Rub=C3=A9n?= Justo Cc: Dragan Simic , git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] branch: rework the descriptions of rename and copy operations In-Reply-To: (=?utf-8?Q?=22Rub=C3=A9n?= Justo"'s message of "Thu, 15 Feb 2024 22:52:36 +0100") References: <3cbc78bb5729f304b30bf37a18d1762af553aa00.1708022441.git.dsimic@manjaro.org> Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2024 14:13:31 -0800 Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 74F304AA-CC4F-11EE-9528-78DCEB2EC81B-77302942!pb-smtp1.pobox.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Rub=C3=A9n Justo writes: > On 15-feb-2024 19:42:32, Dragan Simic wrote: > >> Move the descriptions of the and arguments to = the >> descriptions of the branch rename and copy operations, where they natu= rally >> belong. > > Thank you Dragan for working on this. > > Let me chime in just to say that maybe another terms could be considere= d > here; like: "" and "" (maybe too long...) o= r > so. > > I have no problem with the current terms, but "" can be a > sensible choice here as it is already being used for other commands > where, and this may help overall, the consideration: "if ommited, the > current branch is considered" also applies. Actually, we should go in the opposite direction. When the use of names are localized in a narrower context, they can be shortened without losing clarity. For example: -m [] :: rename the branch (defaults to the current one) to . is just as clear as the same description with and . With the original text without any of the suggested changes, and appeared very far from the context they are used in (i.e. the description for -m and -c), and it may have helped readers to tell that these are names of branches. But if the context is clear that we are talking about "renaming" branches, there is not as much added benefit to say "branch" in these names as in the current text.