Subject: git shorthands (was: Re: Wine + GIT)

From: Andreas Ericsson <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 06 Dec 2005 22:22:27 +0100

Jon Loeliger wrote:
> 
> That way:
>     "git mer" would fail
>     "git merge" would run "git-merge"
>     "git merge-" would fail
>     "git merge-o" would fail,
>     "git-merge-oc" would run "git-merge-octopus".
> 
> Any interest?  Overkill?  Bad idea?
> 

I think it's overkill. It would be better, methinks, to add mnemonic-ish 
shorthands for the porcelainish commands, so that

	git fp   => git-format-patch
	git co   => git-checkout
	git up   => git-update-index
	git octo => git-merge-octopus
	git fsck => git-fsck-objects
	git hash => git-hash-object

and so on...

This because non-ambiguous is rarely logical (for git at least, which 
has 'git-<family>-<action | object-type>) unless one knows the entire 
command anyways. Ambiguity may also be introduced by later commands, and 
then you'll need to re-learn them. I always find that annoying.

-- 
Andreas Ericsson                   [email-masked]
OP5 AB                             www.op5.se
Tel: +46 8-230225                  Fax: +46 8-230231