[RFC/PATCH] doc: git-foo was obsoleted several years ago

[RFC/PATCH] doc: git-foo was obsoleted several years ago

[Felipe Contreras]

So replace 'git-foo' with 'git foo'.

Signed-off-by: Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com>
---
 Documentation/git-checkout.txt | 4 ++--
 Documentation/git-commit.txt   | 4 ++--
 Documentation/git-rebase.txt   | 4 ++--
 Documentation/git-status.txt   | 4 ++--
 4 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

diff --git a/Documentation/git-checkout.txt b/Documentation/git-checkout.txt
index ca118ac..8d98383 100644
--- a/Documentation/git-checkout.txt
+++ b/Documentation/git-checkout.txt
@@ -1,9 +1,9 @@
-git-checkout(1)
+git checkout(1)
 ===============
 
 NAME
 ----
-git-checkout - Checkout a branch or paths to the working tree
+git checkout - Checkout a branch or paths to the working tree
 
 SYNOPSIS
 --------
diff --git a/Documentation/git-commit.txt b/Documentation/git-commit.txt
index 1a7616c..51f6b81 100644
--- a/Documentation/git-commit.txt
+++ b/Documentation/git-commit.txt
@@ -1,9 +1,9 @@
-git-commit(1)
+git commit(1)
 =============
 
 NAME
 ----
-git-commit - Record changes to the repository
+git commit - Record changes to the repository
 
 SYNOPSIS
 --------
diff --git a/Documentation/git-rebase.txt b/Documentation/git-rebase.txt
index 6b2e1c8..ed4f5f6 100644
--- a/Documentation/git-rebase.txt
+++ b/Documentation/git-rebase.txt
@@ -1,9 +1,9 @@
-git-rebase(1)
+git rebase(1)
 =============
 
 NAME
 ----
-git-rebase - Forward-port local commits to the updated upstream head
+git rebase - Forward-port local commits to the updated upstream head
 
 SYNOPSIS
 --------
diff --git a/Documentation/git-status.txt b/Documentation/git-status.txt
index 9046df9..a128453 100644
--- a/Documentation/git-status.txt
+++ b/Documentation/git-status.txt
@@ -1,9 +1,9 @@
-git-status(1)
+git status(1)
 =============
 
 NAME
 ----
-git-status - Show the working tree status
+git status - Show the working tree status
 
 
 SYNOPSIS
-- 
1.8.4.9.g218b36e.dirty

Re: [RFC/PATCH] doc: git-foo was obsoleted several years ago

[Junio C Hamano]

Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com> writes:

> So replace 'git-foo' with 'git foo'.
>
> Signed-off-by: Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com>
> ---
>  Documentation/git-checkout.txt | 4 ++--
>  Documentation/git-commit.txt   | 4 ++--
>  Documentation/git-rebase.txt   | 4 ++--
>  Documentation/git-status.txt   | 4 ++--
>  4 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

Running

    $ head Documentaiton/git-c*.txt

shows that others e.g. git-cat-file.txt also begin with the same
pattern, i.e. git-dashed-command(section) as the first header, and
name section also lists the command in the dashed form, which makes
one wonder why only these four are singled-out. It could have been
"This is merely an RFC to show the kind fo things the submitter
thinks we need to do; the real version, if list agrees that it is a
good thing to do, would cover a lot more files.", but then it would
have saved wasted time guessing if the message said so.

I recall that I wanted to see this change happen myself long time
ago, and suspect that there may have been some reason that prevented
us from doing so.  I might have found that AsciiDoc back then did
not like the input if the headline name "git-checkout(1)" did not
match the filename "git-checkout.txt" and the command in the NAME
section "git-checkout", or links "linkgit:git-checkout[1]" from
other pages couldn't have SP there, or something silly like that.

Also doesn't our build infrastructure slurp the one-line description
"git-checkout - Checkout a branch ..." from these files and expect a
dash to be there?

In short, I personally do prefer to see dashless form at the top of
the manpage, if it does not break other things, and there may need
changes necessary to avoid breaking other things may to files other
than these documentation-proper source files.

> diff --git a/Documentation/git-checkout.txt b/Documentation/git-checkout.txt
> index ca118ac..8d98383 100644
> --- a/Documentation/git-checkout.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/git-checkout.txt
> @@ -1,9 +1,9 @@
> -git-checkout(1)
> +git checkout(1)
>  ===============
>  
>  NAME
>  ----
> -git-checkout - Checkout a branch or paths to the working tree
> +git checkout - Checkout a branch or paths to the working tree
>  
>  SYNOPSIS
>  --------
> ...

Re: [RFC/PATCH] doc: git-foo was obsoleted several years ago

[Jeff King]

On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 02:38:27PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:

> >  Documentation/git-checkout.txt | 4 ++--
> [...]
> I recall that I wanted to see this change happen myself long time
> ago, and suspect that there may have been some reason that prevented
> us from doing so.  I might have found that AsciiDoc back then did
> not like the input if the headline name "git-checkout(1)" did not
> match the filename "git-checkout.txt" and the command in the NAME
> section "git-checkout", or links "linkgit:git-checkout[1]" from
> other pages couldn't have SP there, or something silly like that.

Yes, I think it is still broken. After applying Felipe's patch:

  $ cd Documentation
  $ make git-checkout.1
      GEN cmd-list.made
      SUBDIR ../
  make[1]: `GIT-VERSION-FILE' is up to date.
      ASCIIDOC git-checkout.xml
      XMLTO git-checkout.1

So far, so good...

  $ man -l git-checkout.1
  man: git-checkout.1: No such file or directory

Huh?

  $ ls git?checkout.1
  git_checkout.1

Oh.

There is similar asciidoc (actually, I think it is docbook) cleverness
with:

  $ make gitignore.1
      GEN cmd-list.made
      SUBDIR ../
      make[1]: `GIT-VERSION-FILE' is up to date.
      XMLTO gitignore.1

  $ ls gitignore.[0-9]
  gitignore.5

Now obviously what I asked for is wrong (we do not actually know how to
make gitignore.1), but I have certainly been confused by this in the
past when working on pages outside of section 1.

In both cases, it would be nice if we could tell xmlto "no, really, put
the output in this file". I'm not sure that is an option, though,
because in theory docbook output may be multiple files (the "-o" option
actually specifies an output directory).

Since we know our manpages are a much simpler case, we could probably
work around it by teaching the Makefile that building "git-foo.txt"
generates git_foo.1, and then moving that to git-foo.1.

-Peff

Re: [RFC/PATCH] doc: git-foo was obsoleted several years ago

[Jakub Narębski]

W dniu 2013-10-16 23:38, Junio C Hamano pisze:
> Felipe Contreras<felipe.contreras@gmail.com>  writes:
[...]
> I recall that I wanted to see this change happen myself long time
> ago, and suspect that there may have been some reason that prevented
> us from doing so.  I might have found that AsciiDoc back then did
> not like the input if the headline name "git-checkout(1)" did not
> match the filename "git-checkout.txt" and the command in the NAME
> section "git-checkout", or links "linkgit:git-checkout[1]" from
> other pages couldn't have SP there, or something silly like that.
>
> Also doesn't our build infrastructure slurp the one-line description
> "git-checkout - Checkout a branch ..." from these files and expect a
> dash to be there?
>
> In short, I personally do prefer to see dashless form at the top of
> the manpage, if it does not break other things, and there may need
> changes necessary to avoid breaking other things may to files other
> than these documentation-proper source files.
>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/git-checkout.txt b/Documentation/git-checkout.txt
>> index ca118ac..8d98383 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/git-checkout.txt
>> +++ b/Documentation/git-checkout.txt
>> @@ -1,9 +1,9 @@
>> -git-checkout(1)
>> +git checkout(1)
>>  ===============

I wonder if it wouldn't be better to leave as is, in dashed form,
as the manpage file name is git-checkout.1, and this manpage is
invoked as "man git-checkout", not "man git checkout"
or "man 'git checkout'".

>>   NAME
>>   ----
>> -git-checkout - Checkout a branch or paths to the working tree
>> +git checkout - Checkout a branch or paths to the working tree
>>
>>   SYNOPSIS
>>   --------
>> ...

But change this, as we use this command as "git checkout", not
as "git-checkout".

-- 
Jakub Narębski

Re: [RFC/PATCH] doc: git-foo was obsoleted several years ago

[Antoine Pelisse]

On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 1:13 PM, Jakub Narębski <jnareb@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Felipe Contreras<felipe.contreras@gmail.com>  writes:
>>> diff --git a/Documentation/git-checkout.txt
>>> b/Documentation/git-checkout.txt
>>> index ca118ac..8d98383 100644
>>> --- a/Documentation/git-checkout.txt
>>> +++ b/Documentation/git-checkout.txt
>>> @@ -1,9 +1,9 @@
>>> -git-checkout(1)
>>> +git checkout(1)
>>>  ===============
>
>
> I wonder if it wouldn't be better to leave as is, in dashed form,
> as the manpage file name is git-checkout.1, and this manpage is
> invoked as "man git-checkout", not "man git checkout"
> or "man 'git checkout'".

This is partly true, as you can also run it with `git checkout --help`

Re: [RFC/PATCH] doc: git-foo was obsoleted several years ago

[Junio C Hamano]

Jakub Narębski <jnareb@gmail.com> writes:

> W dniu 2013-10-16 23:38, Junio C Hamano pisze:
>> I recall that I wanted to see this change happen myself long time
>> ago,...
>> In short, I personally do prefer to see dashless form at the top of
>> the manpage, if it does not break other things, and there may need
>> changes necessary to avoid breaking other things may to files other
>> than these documentation-proper source files.
>> ...
> I wonder if it wouldn't be better to leave as is, in dashed form,
> ...
> But change this, as we use this command as "git checkout", not
> as "git-checkout".

Yes, that is what I meant by "dashless form at the top of the
manpage, if it does not break other things". "man git-cat-file"
is one of "other things".