Re: [PATCH 7/7] Documentation: git-init: flesh out example

[Linus Arver <linusarver@gmail.com>]

On Wed, Aug 06, 2014 at 10:41:10AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Linus Arver <linusarver@gmail.com> writes:
> 
> > On Tue, Aug 05, 2014 at 03:14:48PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> >> Linus Arver <linusarver@gmail.com> writes:
> >> 
> >> > Signed-off-by: Linus Arver <linusarver@gmail.com>
> >> > ---
> >> >  Documentation/git-init.txt | 6 ++++--
> >> >  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >> >
> >> > diff --git a/Documentation/git-init.txt b/Documentation/git-init.txt
> >> > index b94d165..16e9f9c 100644
> >> > --- a/Documentation/git-init.txt
> >> > +++ b/Documentation/git-init.txt
> >> > @@ -138,10 +138,12 @@ Start a new Git repository for an existing code base::
> >> >  $ cd /path/to/my/codebase
> >> >  $ git init      <1>
> >> >  $ git add .     <2>
> >> > +$ git commit    <3>
> >> 
> >> I agree it is a good discipline to make the initial "pristine"
> >> import immediately after "git add ." without doing anything else.
> >> Perhaps the description below wants to make it more explicit?
> >> 
> >
> > I could add a comment like the following:
> >
> >     For new repositories, creating a commit immediately after "git add
> >     ." is good practice as it will cleanly separate any preexisting work
> >     (done under some other VCS, for example) from any new work done with
> >     git.
> >
> > Does this make sense? I am not sure how explicit you want it to be, or
> > whether I captured what you wanted to be explained.
> 
> I was thinking more along the lines of
> 
>     <3> Record the pristine state as the first commit in the history.
> 
> which should suffice without becoming excessively verbose.

Ah yes, I like the brevity.

> > Actually, I would like to know if anything is special about the
> > "root-commit"...
> 
> As far as Git is concerned, they are just ordinary commits without
> any parents.  A commit in Git can have zero or more parents, so from
> that "structural" point of view, they are not that special.
> 
> They are considered special by users because they represent the
> beginning of the project history.

Thank you for the insight. I won't bother adding a blurb about
"root-commit" and what it means because they are not that special, as
you said so yourself.