From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [PATCH] Documentation: make formatting more consistent Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2015 00:45:05 -0500 Message-ID: <20151113054505.GA32233@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <20151111214106.GA2208@sigill.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy To: =?utf-8?B?0JDQvdC00YDQtdC5INCg0YvQsdCw0Lo=?= X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Nov 13 06:45:16 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Zx7Ag-0004BA-5R for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Fri, 13 Nov 2015 06:45:14 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752126AbbKMFpJ (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Nov 2015 00:45:09 -0500 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([50.56.180.127]:56955 "HELO cloud.peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1751106AbbKMFpI (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Nov 2015 00:45:08 -0500 Received: (qmail 15100 invoked by uid 102); 13 Nov 2015 05:45:08 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.1) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with SMTP; Thu, 12 Nov 2015 23:45:07 -0600 Received: (qmail 21704 invoked by uid 107); 13 Nov 2015 05:45:37 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with SMTP; Fri, 13 Nov 2015 00:45:37 -0500 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Fri, 13 Nov 2015 00:45:05 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20151111214106.GA2208@sigill.intra.peff.net> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 04:41:06PM -0500, Jeff King wrote: > I know we've discussed this particular spot before, and I think there > may have been some disagreement about which style was the best. But > since clearly no patch came out of the last discussion, and since > an inconsistent set of styles is probably worse than consistent use of > any of the choices, this makes sense to me as an incremental step. > > If we want to move to all-backticks (for example) later on, we can > easily do so (or we can leave this as the final state). Andrey helpfully dug up that thread off-list: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/267990/ If we want to move to backticks, we probably want to also turn on MAN_BOLD_LITERAL by default, or it's a step backwards for some folks. As I was the person who suggested backticks back in that thread, and I do not want to spend the time myself on figuring out if MAN_BOLD_LITERAL is safe to use everywhere, I somewhat retract my suggestion. I've queued this patch as-is for now, but I'd be happy to hear other opinions, or if people want to dig into the MAN_BOLD_LITERAL thing. -Peff