Re: [PATCH 0/6] Make 'git help everyday' work

["Philip Oakley" <philipoakley@iee.org>]

From: "Junio C Hamano" <gitster@pobox.com>
> "Philip Oakley" <philipoakley@iee.org> writes:
>
>> From: "Junio C Hamano" <gitster@pobox.com>
>>>I think we already use a nicer way to set up a page alias to keep
>>> old links working than making a copy in Documentation/; please mimic
>>> that if possible.
>>
>> This was mainly about ensuring that the 'git help' command could
>> access these extra extra guides that it currently misses. (Tt also
>> misses the 'user-manual', which isn't a man page, but could have a
>> link page to guide the seeker of truth between 'git help' and the
>> actual user-manual)
>>
>> The only method I can see for that (via help.c) is to get the 
>> filename
>> format correct.  Where you thinking of something else?
>
> I do not have an objection against the creation of giteveryday.txt;
> I was questioning the way the original everyday.txt was left behind
> to bit-rot.  It is good to keep _something_ there, because there may
> be old URLs floating around that point at Documentation/everyday.txt,
> but the contents of that file does not have to be a stale copy.
>
> Cf. bd4a3d61 (Rename {git- => git}remote-helpers.txt, 2013-01-31)
> for how we renamed git-remote-helpers.txt to gitremote-helpers.txt
>

The commit also highlighted a couple of other places I needed to update

What's the right set of options for format-patch to avoid the bulk 
deletions and bulk insertions between the old an new versions? That 
commit was amended in situ, so never had the three way 
delete/move/create problem.

We have:
everyday.txt (old) -> delete
everyday.txt (new) ->create (<5% similarity)
everyday.txt (old) -> giteveryday.txt (>95% similarity)

It just feels that 400+ lines of complete deletion doesn't need to be in 
the summary patch. I have it in my mind that we always end up with the 
deletions being listed.

Philip