On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 10:33 AM, Jeff King <p...@peff.net> wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 10:27:19AM -0700, Stefan Beller wrote:
>> > I'm not fond of that, as it's vague about which exact trailers we're
>> > talking about. I also thought of something like --verbatim, but I'd
>> > worry that would seem to conflict with --normalize.
>> > I dunno. All of the names seem not quite descriptive enough to me.
>> I meant 'exact' as in 'exactly from the patch/commit, no external
>> influence such as config', so maybe '--from-patch' or '--from-commit'
>> (which says the same as --no-config just the other way round.
>> Having --no- in config options as the standard is a UX disaster
>> IMHO as then we have to forbid the --no-no-X or reintroduce X
>> and flip the default)
> Yes, that was definitely the other reason I didn't want to call it
> "--no-config". :)
> It's not always from a patch or commit. The most accurate along those
> lines is "--from-input".
>> Maybe --genuine ?
> But in the greater context I think that's vague again; we don't know
> which part of the command's operation is "genuine".
The input of course. ;) --genuine-input.
> Perhaps "--exact-input" hits all of those. Or maybe "--only-input" to
> match the other "--only".
> I think I like that last one the best. It makes it clear that we are
> looking just at the input, and not anything else. Which is exactly what
> the feature does.
Makes sense to me,