From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.5 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id CEAF71F4F8 for ; Wed, 5 Oct 2016 21:41:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753340AbcJEVlS (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Oct 2016 17:41:18 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com ([64.147.108.70]:53491 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752829AbcJEVlS (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Oct 2016 17:41:18 -0400 Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0DA4544295; Wed, 5 Oct 2016 17:41:17 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=6/iAy1iTeclISMqfj/OGP0Mb8oE=; b=Den10+ v5Au9b1sHpgqxUIGKaX57F9RJ3FUmdZ8yHqBOA0l2FaJHw1Q1S+uLpzofkG4A0s5 S8QjrTQSzmXOPER+pz5ymHcIIWvnfB65Wd6voyI9Y09PqrqFR+YFSI/HWKzHXLcD eTji4mp4uIU9bML408puv6qPIof74EjhH2H0s= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=cLPsTnec1iWtaSk8Itb8hlujvO807F/G cdAeU525dPb5dJ+3no4cZZhWqwaZsbfk/z99ctO4LkB7EVlp2g8l3XRVwnesjdSE KvWJYQ3pBJIOfieJU0mw8gkXFERm0zCkjrtrcGOYEPRA46m6ewNWiWwNy+AfPL8L fnkaM0VuZeQ= Received: from pb-smtp1.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 05D4844294; Wed, 5 Oct 2016 17:41:17 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [104.132.0.95]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7C01E44293; Wed, 5 Oct 2016 17:41:16 -0400 (EDT) From: Junio C Hamano To: Sergey Organov Cc: git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/6] Documentation/git-merge.txt: improve short description in DESCRIPTION References: <871szuqyjo.fsf@javad.com> Date: Wed, 05 Oct 2016 14:41:14 -0700 In-Reply-To: <871szuqyjo.fsf@javad.com> (Sergey Organov's message of "Thu, 06 Oct 2016 00:24:43 +0300") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 71D4CB90-8B44-11E6-9C25-F99D12518317-77302942!pb-smtp1.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Sergey Organov writes: > OK, I see. So, what is the best way to handle this? Immediately follow > content change patch with another patch that only re-flows? Or no reflowing at all. >> the parents". I do not know if the updated phrasing is better. The >> "name" in the original was meant to be a short-hand for "object name", >> and I would support a change to spell it out to clarify; "reference" >> can be a vague word that can mean different things in Git, and when >> the word is given without context, most Git people would think that >> the word refers to "refs", but that is definitely not what the new >> commit records, so... > > I won't insist on the change, but "name" sounded wrong to me, and > "reference" was most general term I was able to come up with in this > context. > ... > Last, if "reference" is not good enough and we get to internals anyway, > why not say SHA1 then? Because that is still colloquial? I think s/name/object name/ is a sensible change, but not s/name/reference/.