Better name for dpush wanted

[Andrew Bennetts]

Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
[...]
>  > What makes pull's behaviour unintuitive?  Is it because pull's  
>  > behaviour doesn't map to the similarly named pull on the other DVCSs?
[...]
> I think in both cases ("missing" and "pull") your intuition is simply
> conditioned by your preferred DVCS so that you don't recognize that
> they can easily be confusing to others.

I should point out that “pull” seems like a good name to me because it's
very much like “push” but in the opposite direction.  The options that they
both take and the effects of those options are basically the same, except
that pull cannot create a new branch whereas push can.

That doesn't necessarily make “pull” the best label, but there's definitely
a symmetry with push to it that I find quite attractive.  And that makes me
suspect that if pull should change, then so should push.

-Andrew.