From: "Kristoffer Haugsbakk" <kristofferhaugsbakk@fastmail.com>
To: "Patrick Steinhardt" <ps@pks.im>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/4] doc: transform breaking changes doc to a manpage
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2026 16:17:44 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2e53feae-94fe-4e1b-9665-2a639fe08515@app.fastmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ar0OicAaDipYx-xU@pks.im>
On Wed, Sep 30, 2026, at 15:28, Patrick Steinhardt wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 28, 2026 at 12:41:25PM +0200,
> kristofferhaugsbakk@fastmail.com wrote:
>> From: Kristoffer Haugsbakk <code@khaugsbakk.name>
>>
>> The breaking changes document is not a regular Git documentation page.
>> That means that you cannot navigate to the doc with git(1), i.e. with:
>>
>> git help BreakingChanges
>>
>> You instead have to download the Git project source. Or go to
>> git-scm.com.[1] Then you get this disclaimer:[2]
>>
>> This information is specific to the Git project
>>
>> Please note that this information is only relevant to you if you
>> plan on contributing to the Git project itself. It is in no shape or
>> form required reading for regular Git users.
>>
>> But this document is relevant to *all* Git users. Everyone should have
>> as easy access to it as the other doc and guide pages.
>
> Yeah, I agree with that sentiment.
I’m glad that this idea makes sense to more than one person. x)
> [...] The one interesting question about it is of course what we'll do
> with the document once Git 3.0 is out. Will we retain it? Will we
> remove it? Will we empty it and make it focus on Git 4.0?
>
> I guess once it's a manpage we should definitely retain its contents for
> a while longer. The breaking changes will be relevant to users even
> after they've already upgraded to Git 3.0. But if so, we should probably
> introduce a new section for Git 4.0, at least if we already want to
> start thinking about that.
>
> NB: even if we start thinking about it I think we should probably not
> release it anytime soon. I guess having a major release once per
> decade may be good enough.
I know you are wondering out loud here to the fora. But just personally,
I imagine that this will happen after Git 3.0:
• A section at the end about Git 3.0 for historical interest as well as
people on older versions who might be browsing outside of their
installation (probably git-scm) (and who might be on pre-3.0)
• Git 4.0 discussion before that, however hypothetical or distant the
release date
>
>> To that end, let’s move the text to a manpage. But keep the old page,
>> just linking to the new one. (We wouldn’t want to break any readers.)
>>
>> Just do the minimal changes for the new format. Also demote the first
>> section to the second level, i.e. make “Introduction” the same level
>> as “Procedure’.
>
> I feel like a good first step could've been to convert the
> BreakingChanges.adoc document in-place to use the new format. Like that,
> it would've become way easier to see what's actually changing. The
> rename could've then been a 1:1 move.
Like this?
1. Convert to the manpage format without changing the filename
2. Rename the file: pure rename without any other modifications
3. Resurrect `BreakingChanges.adoc` with one line that points to the new
document
Thanks for reviewing.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-09-30 14:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-09-28 10:41 [RFC PATCH 0/4] doc: move BreakingChanges to a manpage kristofferhaugsbakk
2026-09-28 10:41 ` [RFC PATCH 1/4] doc: transform breaking changes doc " kristofferhaugsbakk
2026-09-30 13:28 ` Patrick Steinhardt
2026-09-30 14:17 ` Kristoffer Haugsbakk [this message]
2026-09-30 14:28 ` Patrick Steinhardt
2026-09-28 10:41 ` [RFC PATCH 2/4] doc: gitbreaking-changes: replace msg-ids with URLs kristofferhaugsbakk
2026-09-30 13:28 ` Patrick Steinhardt
2026-09-30 14:09 ` Kristoffer Haugsbakk
2026-09-30 19:45 ` Junio C Hamano
2026-10-01 6:27 ` Patrick Steinhardt
2026-10-03 11:52 ` Kristoffer Haugsbakk
2026-10-03 14:10 ` Kristoffer Haugsbakk
2026-10-04 2:31 ` Junio C Hamano
2026-10-06 16:38 ` Kristoffer Haugsbakk
2026-10-06 20:33 ` Junio C Hamano
2026-09-28 10:41 ` [RFC PATCH 3/4] doc: gitbreaking-changes: add note about living document kristofferhaugsbakk
2026-09-28 10:41 ` [RFC PATCH 4/4] doc: git: mention gitbreaking-changes(7) kristofferhaugsbakk
2026-10-08 19:27 ` [PATCH v2 0/5] doc: move BreakingChanges to a manpage kristofferhaugsbakk
2026-10-08 19:27 ` [PATCH v2 1/5] doc: BreakingChanges: transform " kristofferhaugsbakk
2026-10-08 19:46 ` D. Ben Knoble
2026-10-09 8:24 ` Kristoffer Haugsbakk
2026-10-08 19:27 ` [PATCH v2 2/5] doc: gitbreaking-changes: create from BreakingChanges kristofferhaugsbakk
2026-10-08 19:27 ` [PATCH v2 3/5] doc: gitbreaking-changes: replace msg-ids with URLs kristofferhaugsbakk
2026-10-08 19:27 ` [PATCH v2 4/5] doc: gitbreaking-changes: add note about living document kristofferhaugsbakk
2026-10-08 19:27 ` [PATCH v2 5/5] doc: gitbreaking-changes: move new-items discussion to the end kristofferhaugsbakk
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=2e53feae-94fe-4e1b-9665-2a639fe08515@app.fastmail.com \
--to=kristofferhaugsbakk@fastmail.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ps@pks.im \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox