From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail.manjaro.org (mail.manjaro.org [116.203.91.91]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E4665133405 for ; Fri, 16 Feb 2024 21:58:41 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=116.203.91.91 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1708120724; cv=none; b=pIX5JAncDlM2aGknI8IHp/THds/BIypVwqCH409BM/orQlGU/6/SEyOeIuRAmrZjp4gzqGe7c43sSJIDDYUE+fvxFPaU0kjPwUG5lGdm8KRZ7PCo7dLNKU60nuPbITx0kEspW9xhLDco1OfhWUHcTU9bK3mADIy1fbYVSDTZ/yA= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1708120724; c=relaxed/simple; bh=tjf4CJ+4EOozLJb3rma55V9mVEHi62g+/v9Nh9t4pI0=; h=MIME-Version:Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References: Message-ID:Content-Type; b=iU0XFhJeR4yJIECuuquT6eulv7M9pQW7XWMPFZXvYAYQfI40dOaqEaKH80bEdyL2BBI3xSCdpJry31TNXxlwuuJ2j/Cy2w4PIfSELPTzPgqIoLpGR/oJuKUJck48KvOFEAgaVV5bn/naqR1hJCgCWPKJBumR/KgiXGcrJDa5aQI= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=manjaro.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=manjaro.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=manjaro.org header.i=@manjaro.org header.b=eR+Y2V+e; arc=none smtp.client-ip=116.203.91.91 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=manjaro.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=manjaro.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=manjaro.org header.i=@manjaro.org header.b="eR+Y2V+e" Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=manjaro.org; s=2021; t=1708120719; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=0sUH6b/2aBmZODPn6broEd6SZ7gjrOy9sgIDxVhFmD0=; b=eR+Y2V+eAGf0DjbyYA8Gpf5ldD/jBsGTX/Q4bi5s8K3YQA/g5ntioYQJpVreICxHot9r2h uu+R19tjHgycwjNhTRu5IcmHMAwQnHpnjrLk0yWN+yICbVVQB1xNRcraOvrZ5vAWstqIXS pip/8GsI/dgqXyDEXce0urZQ8P88OM9lCeA5Wa/tUg75wFVVjsJtNDhXPaSkfUDwSjK8gn L15wqk2lq/QHOP/CCriNblN4u/8qx6fma92k2A+SuRGND+aHtPGoqVnXQaYEsROs0z5rXI EuncpVhGRjUfSMd5fArigEAKebKjoj76w8s9vF4hbZV4tiQEC1VpW1gxbdHhRQ== Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2024 22:58:39 +0100 From: Dragan Simic To: Junio C Hamano Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, code@khaugsbakk.name, rjusto@gmail.com, spectral@google.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] branch: rework the descriptions of rename and copy operations In-Reply-To: References: <6e1c3f2c5816f09aab561bc7dec2b7455d70aaec.1708087213.git.dsimic@manjaro.org> <608b4e81d71a95c820f1e4068382d391@manjaro.org> Message-ID: <7fc9dddac54d09f706419c903911a73c@manjaro.org> X-Sender: dsimic@manjaro.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Authentication-Results: ORIGINATING; auth=pass smtp.auth=dsimic@manjaro.org smtp.mailfrom=dsimic@manjaro.org On 2024-02-16 22:45, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Dragan Simic writes: > >>> But the halfway modification to the description section in this >>> patch is not an improvement. It makes some options described there >>> while -m and -c are completely missing now, making the section >>> incomplete and coverage of the operating modes of the command >>> uneven. >> >> If I got it right, you'd prefer this patch not to be accepted >> separately, but as part of the future series that would rework the >> entire git-branch(1) man page? I'm fine with that as well. > > Not necessarily. If you wanted to this this in multiple steps, we > can first whip the OPTIONS part into a good shape, and then fix the > DESCRIPTION part. I'll think a bit more about it, to see what might be our best choice moving forward. > What we want to avoid (not limited to this topic) is to say "this > temporarily makes things worse here, but trust me it will eventually > become perfect". Removing only -m/-c from the description section > makes the description section worse than before the patch---we'd be > better off leaving the original as-is if we are not revamping the > entire section. The way you wrote this brought a smile to my face. :) I agree, making things a bit worse while promising perfection later is rarely justified. Perhaps only when some nasty bug has to be fixed ASAP.