Re: [PATCH v3 01/16] doc: pull: explain what is a fast-forward

[Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>]

Hi,

On Mon, Dec 7, 2020 at 2:22 PM Felipe Contreras
<felipe.contreras@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Dec 7, 2020 at 2:45 PM Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
> >
> > Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com> writes:
> >
> > > We want users to know what is a fast-forward in order to understand the
> > > default warning.
> >
> > The intention is very good, but ...
> >
> > > +------------
> > > +       A---B---C master on origin
> > > +      /
> > > +    D---E master
> > > +------------
> > > +
> > > +Then `git pull` will merge in a fast-foward way up to the new master.
> >
> > ... I find the phrase "in a fast-forward way" a bit awkward.
> > Perhaps use the 'fast-forward' as a verb, i.e.
> >
> >         Then `git pull` notices that what is being merged is a
> >         descendant of our current branch, and fast-forwards our
> >         'master' branch to the commit.
> >
> > or something like that?  It should be in line with the spirit in
> > which glossary defines fast-forward, I would think.
>
> The glossary defines a fast-forward as:
>
>   A fast-forward is a special type of `merge`
>
> So, if you consider "merge" a noun, then a fast-forward is an
> adjective. If you consider it a verb, then it's an adverb. But it's
> not a verb.

A square is a special type of a rectangle, but that doesn't make
"square" an adjective; both square and rectangle are nouns.

> If it was a verb, then we should have `git fast-forward`, which may
> not be a terrible idea, but right now a fast-forward is a modifier.
>
> At least that's what I have in my mind, and the glossary seems to agree.

If you read the release notes and even various messages printed by
git, "fast-forwards", "fast-forwarded", "fast-forwarding", and "to
fast-forward" all appear multiple times.  And yes, "fast-forward" also
appears multiple times as a noun in addition to the various uses as a
verb.  So, I'd say the glossary just isn't comprehensive because in
this case we have a word that serves as both a noun and a verb.


Going back to the text Junio highlighted, I agree with him that the
phrase looks really awkward, and much prefer his suggestion
(regardless of whether it aligns with the current glossary).

> > > +
> > > +------------
> > > +    D---E---A---B---C master, origin/master
> > > +------------
> > > +
> > > +However, a non-fast-foward case looks very different.
> >
> > s/foward/forward/ (the same typo exists above);
>
> All right.
>
> --
> Felipe Contreras