Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Suggestion: rename --edit to --reword, and --cut to --split or --chop #40

Open
gerboengels opened this issue Sep 27, 2019 · 8 comments
Open

Comments

@gerboengels
Copy link

In an interactive rebase, 'edit' means changing the contents of the commit, which is not available in revise. So --edit might be a bit confusing, as it actually corresponds to rewording a commit.
Should this be renamed to --reword?

As a non-native English speaker, when I encounter 'cut' in an application, I link it to cut/copy/paste (so: delete-and-place-on-clipboard). I think a term like 'split' covers the goal more clearly (supported by the fact that the man page explains the feature with 'split' and 'splitting').
This should not only impact command line option --cut, but also command cut in an interactive revise. Here, split will conflict with squash. So maybe chop (and --chop) is a feasible alternative?

@alerque
Copy link
Contributor

alerque commented Sep 27, 2019

As a native English speaker I think both of these suggestions make a lot of sense. I remember being confused by both of them. I was so eager to use the tool I got over it, but it's still not intuitive.

Why does "split" conflict with "squash"?

@gerboengels
Copy link
Author

@alerque In an interactive revise, you can type p instead of pick, or s instead of squash. But that s will conflict with s for split

@gerboengels
Copy link
Author

Maybe -e should be kept as an alias for --reword/-r, for those why type git revise -ie from muscle memory? (same for -c?)

@mystor
Copy link
Owner

mystor commented Sep 27, 2019

cut was actually initially named split, but was changed due to the first-letter conflict with squash while I was adding interactive-mode. I don't have any particular attachment to the name cut, but I'm not convinced that chop is much more clear. Perhaps it's worth the conflict to use the more intuitive split name.

I'd be open to supporting --reword as an alias for --edit. I honestly don't remember why I chose that name originally, but it may have come from this tool's origin as a commit message editor. The --interactive feature was added later.

I'm more open to breaking changes to the interactive mode than the command line, which I wouldn't want to mess up anyone (including my) muscle memory with.

@parkercoates
Copy link

split feels like the most intuitive choice, but if the single letter conflict with squash is a big problem, maybe divide would be an alternative?

@emilazy
Copy link

emilazy commented Oct 4, 2019

I'd also appreciate -r/--reword as a (preferred) alias for --edit.

@FiloSottile
Copy link

Anecdotally, I did try to use -r assuming it would mean reword just today, and had to look at the help to remember it was -e.

(cut makes sense to me, FWIW.)

@Manishearth
Copy link
Collaborator

I support this too

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

7 participants