The name git-cc doesn't tell you what it does. cc could stand for anything, from email's carbon-copy to cubic centimeters. Worse still, cc is impractically short for tab-completion. git c<tab> brings up all the git subcommand which start with c, with cc somewhere below the top of the list.
Proposal: rename the binary to git-conventional-commit, with git-cc retained as a symlink and/or git-alias. That way, git conv<tab> will complete to git conventional-commit without additional configuration, while git cc [...] will still work normally. Based on my initial experimentation, symlinking git-conventional-commit -> git-cc breaks git tab-completion in bash/zsh, likely due to the symlink's file-mode being different than just a user-executable file: I got lrwxrwxrwx
To avoid renaming the binary, you could git config --global alias.conventional-commit 'cc'. However, that's another installation step in a tool that's meant to be maximally convenient.
To my ~1-2 users: Thoughts?
The name
git-ccdoesn't tell you what it does.cccould stand for anything, from email's carbon-copy to cubic centimeters. Worse still,ccis impractically short for tab-completion.git c<tab>brings up all the git subcommand which start withc, withccsomewhere below the top of the list.Proposal: rename the binary to
git-conventional-commit, withgit-ccretained as a symlink and/or git-alias. That way,git conv<tab>will complete togit conventional-commitwithout additional configuration, whilegit cc [...]will still work normally. Based on my initial experimentation, symlinkinggit-conventional-commit -> git-ccbreaks git tab-completion in bash/zsh, likely due to the symlink's file-mode being different than just a user-executable file: I gotlrwxrwxrwxTo avoid renaming the binary, you could
git config --global alias.conventional-commit 'cc'. However, that's another installation step in a tool that's meant to be maximally convenient.To my ~1-2 users: Thoughts?