It's fine, but it wouldn't hurt to have a more formal alias like `docker push-over-ssh`.

EDIT: why I think it's important because on automations that are developed collaboratively, "pussh" could be seen as a typo by someone unfamiliar with the feature and cause unnecessary confusion, whereas "push-over-ssh" is clearly deliberate. Think of them maybe as short-hand/full flags.

That's a valid concern. You can very easily give it whatever name you like. Docker looks for `docker-COMAND` executables in ~/.docker/cli-plugins directory making COMMAND a `docker` subcommand.

Rename the file to whatever you like, e.g. to get `docker pushoverssh`:

  mv ~/.docker/cli-plugins/docker-pussh ~/.docker/cli-plugins/docker-pushoverssh

Note that Docker doesn't allow dashes in plugin commands.

can easily see an engineer spotting pussh in a ci/cd workflow or something and thinking "this is a mistake" and changing it.

> The extra 's' is for 'sssh'

> What's that extra 's' for?

> That's a typo

and prone to collision!

Indeed so! Because it's art, not engineering. The engineering approach would require a recognizably distinct command, eliminating the possibility of such a pun.

I used to have an alias em=mg, because mg(1) is a small Emacs, so "em" seemed like a fun name for a command.

Until one day I made that typo.

I'm a fan of installing sl(1), the terminal steam locomotive. I mistype it every couple months and it always gives me a laugh.

https://github.com/mtoyoda/sl

In the same spirit there's gti https://r-wos.org/hacks/gti