"submit" command naming - just "bundle" preferred?

[Martin Pool]

I prefer 'send' to 'submit' as it's a more straightforward word than
'submit'.

'send' has only one main meeting, whereas 'submit' has a few and is less
common.

For what it's worth the American Heritage Dictionary has

   1. To yield or surrender (oneself) to the will or authority of another.
   2. To subject to a condition or process.
   3. To commit (something) to the consideration or judgment of
another. See synonyms at propose.
   4. To offer as a proposition or contention: I submit that the terms
are entirely unreasonable.

and in this case our use would be a slightly indirect version of 3 or 4.

'submit' seems to put emphasis on the fact that you are submitting it for
someone else to consider.  That will often be true, whether it is a human
reviewer or pqm, but I don't think it's the essence of the command.

We've heard in the past that a distinction like this which is obvious to
native English speakers may be a real impediment to others.

It's quite possible to talk of 'sending' something over xml http.

It's true that 'send' tends to imply it does actually transmit it, not
just prepare the transmission.  In a way it does send it to a file.
And submitting to a file isn't a real submission anyhow.

If you were looking through the command listing for the command to send
changes by email then I submit that you would probably notice 'send' more
readily than 'submit'.

I agree it's pretty desirable that whichever one we have, we don't change
it too often.

Rather than use a different name because we don't directly send mail yet,
I'd put the right name in and say "sorry, sending mail isn't supported
yet, try -o".

-- 
Martin