Git development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
To: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Cc: Sergey Organov <sorganov@gmail.com>, git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pretty-options.txt: fix --no-abbrev-commit description
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2020 21:32:43 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <xmqqd03cso7o.fsf@gitster.c.googlers.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200827042530.GE3346457@coredump.intra.peff.net> (Jeff King's message of "Thu, 27 Aug 2020 00:25:30 -0400")

Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:

> On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 03:07:52PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
>> Sergey Organov <sorganov@gmail.com> writes:
>> 
>> >> Keeping the original sentence structure, e.g.
>> >>
>> >>     ... and those options which imply abbreviating commit object names
>> >>     such as ...
>> >>
>> >> would have been what I wrote, instead of "either explicit or implied
>> >> by", though.
>> >
>> > Sorry, but it'd then read:
>> >
>> >   This negates `--abbrev-commit` and those options which imply
>> >   abbreviating commit object names such as "--oneline".
>> >
>> > that again essentially reduces to:
>> >
>> >   This negates "--oneline"
>> 
>> "--oneline" means a lot more than "do not use full object name", and
>> I think we are on the same page with our shared goal of not negating
>> everything "--oneline" means.  We just want to say the option
>> negates only the "do not use full object name" aspect.
>> 
>> "and the effect of abbreviating commit objects implied by other
>> options, such as '--oneline'" may be a more verbose way to say the
>> same thing, I would think, but that would be overkill.  I would have
>> expected that with common sense readers would think it would be
>> crazy for --no-abbrev to override everything --oneline means, but if
>> you found that the original risks such an interpretation, perhaps we
>> would need to be more verbose and explicit.  I dunno.
>
> FWIW, as a third-party observer (because you wanted more opinions,
> right?), I found the result of Sergey's original patch easy to read and
> understand.
>
> I also think it's unlikely for people to misinterpret the current text,
> but it does not hurt to be more precise just in case.

Yup, I think I said the same already ;-)

      reply	other threads:[~2020-08-27  4:32 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-08-26 14:49 [PATCH] pretty-options.txt: fix --no-abbrev-commit description Sergey Organov
2020-08-26 17:56 ` Junio C Hamano
2020-08-26 21:55   ` Sergey Organov
2020-08-26 22:07     ` Junio C Hamano
2020-08-27  4:25       ` Jeff King
2020-08-27  4:32         ` Junio C Hamano [this message]

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=xmqqd03cso7o.fsf@gitster.c.googlers.com \
    --to=gitster@pobox.com \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=peff@peff.net \
    --cc=sorganov@gmail.com \
    /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