From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] Remove --allow-empty from the git-commit synopsis Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2010 02:44:50 -0400 Message-ID: <20100408064450.GE30473@coredump.intra.peff.net> References: <1270661327-28078-1-git-send-email-avarab@gmail.com> <7vfx37cckf.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <7vbpduc333.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: =?utf-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsA==?= Bjarmason , git@vger.kernel.org To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Apr 08 08:45:17 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 1NzlUL-0007IL-03 for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Thu, 08 Apr 2010 08:45:17 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758127Ab0DHGpM (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Apr 2010 02:45:12 -0400 Received: from peff.net ([208.65.91.99]:41315 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756299Ab0DHGpL (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Apr 2010 02:45:11 -0400 Received: (qmail 16830 invoked by uid 107); 8 Apr 2010 06:45:10 -0000 Received: from coredump.intra.peff.net (HELO coredump.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.2) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.40) with (AES128-SHA encrypted) SMTP; Thu, 08 Apr 2010 02:45:10 -0400 Received: by coredump.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Thu, 08 Apr 2010 02:44:50 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <7vbpduc333.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Wed, Apr 07, 2010 at 03:25:36PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Junio C Hamano writes: > > > I do not think Jeff was against having a complete listing in the > > documentation. Wasn't his suggestion about "git commit -h" output? > > I'll amend the earlier "allow-empty-message" one from you to cover this > topic. My suggestion was for "git commit -h", and your amended patch addresses it. Thanks. For the record, I am _also_ against having a complete listing at the header of the documentation, but last time this was discussed some others felt differently, and I don't think we reached a consensus on what the manpages should look like (right now some have a very terse synopsis, and some try to list every option). -Peff