branch --bind or branch --bound?

[Ben Finney]

Ian Clatworthy <ian.clatworthy at canonical.com> writes:

> Eli suggested my proposed --bind option for branch be called --bound
> instead. I don't mind either way. What would new users expect the
> option to be called?

Sadly I think the English language fails us here. New users are (I
predict) going to expect whatever word they hear first, *especially* if
their first language is not English.

“I want to bind this branch” versus “I want this to be a bound branch”
is going to determine which spelling the user expects for this option.
So that just pushes the question back another level, but I think it's
the more pertinent level at which to ask.

-- 
 \         “If we don't believe in freedom of expression for people we |
  `\           despise, we don't believe in it at all.” —Noam Chomsky, |
_o__)                                                       1992-11-25 |
Ben Finney