get: add example on downloading normal git files

[danihodovic]

Per iterative/dvc/pull/2837 (from iterative/dvc/issues/2515)

[shcheklein]

I'm fine with obtain. My 2cs though - I would not complicate it and use Download term. May be mention in the description that in certain cases it can be optimized and avoid actual network IO.

[jorgeorpinel]

I already convinced everyone to use "download/copy" 😅 but yeah I also came to that conclusion recently... I'll just open a separate issue to deal with "download/copy"...

[shcheklein]

@jorgeorpinel @danihodovic if it's a small change I think it can be done as part of this ticket?

[jorgeorpinel]

It involves changes in the dvc repo as well as dvc import probably though, so not necessarily that small. But we can try, yes.

p.s. See iterative/dvc#2837 (comment) @shcheklein.

[danihodovic]

@jorgeorpinel what changes exactly in the dvc repo?

[jorgeorpinel]

Command output strings.

Also I'm still not sure what's best. "Download", "obtain", or "download/copy". I kind of like obtain. My intention is to extract this discussion to another issue (that may also apply to the other 3 related commands: get, get-url, and import-url).

[danihodovic]

My intention is to extract this discussion to another issue (that may also apply to the other 3 related commands: get, get-url, and import-url).

I agree with this. I don't want a long discussion on terminology to block the code changes in iterative/dvc#2837

[jorgeorpinel]

iterative/dvc/pull/2837 🙂

[jorgeorpinel]

Some more small things.

[jorgeorpinel]

I've extracted the discussion about terminology to #825.

[danihodovic]

I've extracted the discussion about terminology to #825.

Thanks. I'd prefer to put this on hold until the discussion on terminology has been settled. I feel like I'm changing things back and forth for no good reason.

iterative/dvc#2837 can be merged without this PR as it shouldn't break backwards compatibility or modify existing functionality.

[jorgeorpinel]

No need to put this on hold, please address the review because who knows when we'll get to that other issue. Sorry for the confusion but the back and forth is due to a misunderstanding: I never meant to just replace all the instances of "download" for "obtain" without considering their context. But if you prefer to just revert to "download" everywhere for now, that's also OK. Thanks Dani.

p.s. The usage should match the changes on iterative/dvc#2837 in any case.

[shcheklein]

@jorgeorpinel could you please summarize what else should be addressed here? Should we merge and fix what's left as part of your regular update?

[jorgeorpinel]

Should we merge and fix what's left as part of your regular update

Yes, let's do this. Same strategy as in iterative/dvc/pull/2837 🙂

[jorgeorpinel]

Addressed my pending review in a9a9bda.