Better name for dpush wanted

[Jelmer Vernooij]

Hi Ian,

Ian Clatworthy wrote:
> Did we ever get a better name for dpush (or option to
> push enabling it) agreed? I'd really like to see that
> happen before the current name gains any more inertia.
>   
No, there was some discussion about it but we didn't come up with
anything final. I think the main thing to keep in mind is that the name
should express that the command destroys history in the source branch.
The best name I've heard so far was "push-lossy".

> FWIW, the best suggestion I'd seen/heard so far is
> calling it "push-out".
>   
What does the -out mean in this case exactly?

Cheers,

Jelmer