From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: tytso@mit.edu Subject: Re: master^ is not a local branch -- huh?!? Date: Tue, 2 Feb 2010 16:07:33 -0500 Message-ID: <20100202210732.GI4635@thunk.org> References: <31a97741002010352x1ad27f26ia4d51857bb2d2d4f@mail.gmail.com> <7vpr4o3lg9.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <87aavsu9b3.fsf@osv.gnss.ru> <7vwrywplxz.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <20100202001530.GL9553@machine.or.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: Ron Garret X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Feb 02 22:07:48 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NcPyI-0002Yt-NH for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Tue, 02 Feb 2010 22:07:43 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756259Ab0BBVHi (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Feb 2010 16:07:38 -0500 Received: from thunk.org ([69.25.196.29]:54839 "EHLO thunker.thunk.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756167Ab0BBVHh (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Feb 2010 16:07:37 -0500 Received: from root (helo=closure.thunk.org) by thunker.thunk.org with local-esmtp (Exim 4.50 #1 (Debian)) id 1NcPy9-0006I5-MT; Tue, 02 Feb 2010 16:07:33 -0500 Received: from tytso by closure.thunk.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NcPy9-00043E-1Z; Tue, 02 Feb 2010 16:07:33 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: tytso@thunk.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on thunker.thunk.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Mon, Feb 01, 2010 at 09:23:12PM -0800, Ron Garret wrote: > That's fine. My only aim here is to raise the issue. > > By the way, if you (plural) think it would be helpful I'd be happy to > take a stab at rewriting this part of the manual. Writing docs is a > drag, but it would probably be a useful exercise for me. It's definitely helpful to have someone who is learning how things works to point out deficiencies and (ideally) suggest improvements to the documentation. Most of us here either were around at the beginning, or (like myself) have used git long enough that we *know* how things works, and reading the manual with the eyes of a novice is a skill that few experts have. It's why tech writers are (well, should be) paid the big bucks. :-) - Ted