Re: [RFC/PATCH] git put: an alternative to add/reset/checkout

From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
To: Matthieu Moy <Matthieu.Moy@grenoble-inp.fr>
Cc: Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com>,
	Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>,
	git@vger.kernel.org, Scott Chacon <schacon@gmail.com>,
	Michael Nahas <mike@nahas.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH] git put: an alternative to add/reset/checkout
Date: Wed, 8 Jun 2011 13:30:12 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110608173012.GA4279@sigill.intra.peff.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <vpqtyc0nsfw.fsf@bauges.imag.fr>

On Wed, Jun 08, 2011 at 07:28:35PM +0200, Matthieu Moy wrote:

> > Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:
> >
> >> I find the all-caps ugly, and it is part of what confuses them with
> >> HEAD. At the same time, we are using the same namespace that ref lookup
> >> uses. So calling it "worktree" might be too ambiguous. I tried to avoid
> >> using "--worktree" because I wanted to make it clear that these were
> >> ordered arguments, not options.
> >
> > Perhaps we can use some character that is forbidden in ref names,
> > doesn't make trouble when doing allowed operations on said refs, won't
> > confuse user, and is not trouble with shell... ehhh...
> >
> > * @{wtree} would confuse users that it has something to do with reflog
> 
> Well, we already have @{upstream} ...

Yes, but like all of the @{} things, it's a modifier for the left-hand
side. So "master@{upstream}" is meaningful, and "@{upstream}" is the
same as "HEAD@{upstream}".

What does "master@{wtree}" mean?

-Peff