On Tue, Sep 2, 2025, at 23:33, Junio C Hamano wrote: > jorg@xxxxxxx writes: >> >> My point was merely that IMO "raw" is not the best name for that >> option. When I specify "--raw" on the command line, I usually >> expect the program to output similar data than without that >> option, but of a less refined state or kind. > > Sorry, but you are 20 years too late for *that* party. Once you > invent a time machine and go back 20 years, you can advocate for > different name(s) that may fit your personal preferences better > there. > > But not here and not now. See below: >> I'm not sure if this is the right forum for this discussion, but if I were asked... Given the circumstances, I vote for keeping "git whatchanged". Regards, J
