Re: shouldn't I use update-alternatives for this?
Quoting Sebastian Kuzminsky <firstname.lastname@example.org>:
> I've pushed the "rename it upstream" idea on the upstream maintainers
> twice now and it gets shut down by both Linus (the original author)
> and Junio (the current maintainer). 
There is still the option to rename it for Debian only,
without changing it upstream. Not really nice, but
possible and used in the past, IIRC.
> Qingning Huo suggested using diversions to make /usr/bin/git a little
> selector script that lets the admin & user choose between git-the-shell
> and git-the-scm. This sounds good to me, who objects?
Aarrgghh! :-) That's what alternatives are for and people
already objected for good reasons. Please not.
Either rename the executable to /usr/bin/git-the-scm (or
whatever) or conflict with the other git. Or ask the
other git people to rename their binary. Maybe git-the-scm
is (or will be) in wider use than git-the-shell, so it
might be OK to rename the more "obscure" executable.