From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.9 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0AD0C433DF for ; Wed, 26 Aug 2020 22:08:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 609ED2087C for ; Wed, 26 Aug 2020 22:08:11 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b="YfvrV8L6" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726972AbgHZWIK (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 Aug 2020 18:08:10 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com ([173.228.157.52]:53557 "EHLO pb-smtp20.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726936AbgHZWIA (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 Aug 2020 18:08:00 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDAE8E9007; Wed, 26 Aug 2020 18:07:56 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=u4j8DHpDld/G2/RebHo6YkWAUc8=; b=YfvrV8 L6EmOUJqLgEzkoFoHyqGbZrhGufBLp3MMxI9/MDtcGfHqvkarFppyF3v5Sxyg91h BxDm0zZ+d9jlAT87yKhDLiAQbhx8lJyBpCS8mujYKDv/tKcsLhBC+sAXFOl4q9it oJgOLQLcHIhSjrc6faxd2o1BGha255iUSHjuk= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=Zj/OwlWoCqoBbX6PxRNuNTAIsq0BF8ib bwjcwctlRhxxuTW7Nml9t+s/Bb0FhTdeAtcvUerEOAX831Zi/I8WnUkPucXjN39+ baNpe6Y3fe8foC9Z69wloN/yci/R54XhQ2C/f0rCj0To0rbuCGW0lsc9xL/7si5R 253bYsK+cdU= Received: from pb-smtp20.sea.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E64F3E9006; Wed, 26 Aug 2020 18:07:56 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.75.7.245]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 397BCE9005; Wed, 26 Aug 2020 18:07:54 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Sergey Organov Cc: git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] pretty-options.txt: fix --no-abbrev-commit description References: <20200826144923.16806-1-sorganov@gmail.com> <87pn7d9inu.fsf@osv.gnss.ru> Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2020 15:07:52 -0700 In-Reply-To: <87pn7d9inu.fsf@osv.gnss.ru> (Sergey Organov's message of "Thu, 27 Aug 2020 00:55:17 +0300") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 9725FB12-E7E8-11EA-91BE-F0EA2EB3C613-77302942!pb-smtp20.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Sergey Organov 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.