From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox•com>
To: Anders Melchiorsen <mail@cup•kalibalik.dk>
Cc: git@vger•kernel.org, gitster@pobox•com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/7] Documentation: do not use regexp in refspec descriptions
Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2008 22:35:50 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <7v7i7pba2x.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 1225311945-17100-2-git-send-email-mail@cup.kalibalik.dk
Anders Melchiorsen <mail@cup•kalibalik.dk> writes:
> The refspec format description was a mix of regexp and BNF, making it
> very difficult to read.
>
> The syntax is now easier to read, though wrong: all parts of the
> refspec are actually optional.
It probably is easier to read, but strictly speaking it is not wrong. The
two parts, <src> and <dst>, _always_ exist, even though either or both of
them can be an empty string.
> diff --git a/Documentation/git-push.txt b/Documentation/git-push.txt
> index 6150b1b..df99c0b 100644
> --- a/Documentation/git-push.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/git-push.txt
> @@ -32,7 +32,7 @@ OPTIONS
>
> <refspec>...::
> The canonical format of a <refspec> parameter is
> - `+?<src>:<dst>`; that is, an optional plus `{plus}`, followed
> + `[+]<src>:<dst>`; that is, an optional plus `{plus}`, followed
> by the source ref, followed by a colon `:`, followed by
> the destination ref.
I am wondering if it would be clearer and easier to understand if we just
said:
The canonical format of a <refspec> parameter is
an optional plus `{plus}`, followed by the source ref,
followed by a colon `:`, followed by the destination ref.
Find various forms of refspecs in examples section.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-10-31 5:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-10-29 20:25 Some updates to refspec documentation Anders Melchiorsen
2008-10-29 20:25 ` [PATCH 1/7] Documentation: do not use regexp in refspec descriptions Anders Melchiorsen
2008-10-29 20:25 ` [PATCH 2/7] Documentation: git push repository can also be a remote Anders Melchiorsen
2008-10-29 20:25 ` [PATCH 3/7] Documentation: rework SHA1 description in git push Anders Melchiorsen
2008-10-29 20:25 ` [PATCH 4/7] Documentation: remove a redundant elaboration Anders Melchiorsen
2008-10-29 20:25 ` [PATCH 5/7] Documentation: elaborate on pushing tags Anders Melchiorsen
2008-10-29 20:25 ` [PATCH 6/7] Documentation: mention branches rather than heads Anders Melchiorsen
2008-10-29 20:25 ` [PATCH 7/7] Documentation: avoid using undefined parameters Anders Melchiorsen
2008-10-29 20:40 ` [PATCH 5/7] Documentation: elaborate on pushing tags Daniel Barkalow
2008-10-31 5:36 ` [PATCH 3/7] Documentation: rework SHA1 description in git push Junio C Hamano
2008-11-02 20:13 ` Anders Melchiorsen
2008-10-31 5:35 ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2008-11-02 17:08 ` [PATCH 1/7] Documentation: do not use regexp in refspec descriptions Anders Melchiorsen
2008-10-29 20:41 ` Some updates to refspec documentation Anders Melchiorsen
2008-10-29 20:44 ` Anders Melchiorsen
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=7v7i7pba2x.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org \
--to=gitster@pobox$(echo .)com \
--cc=git@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
--cc=mail@cup$(echo .)kalibalik.dk \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
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