public inbox for git@vger.kernel.org 
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox•com>
To: Sergey Organov <sorganov@gmail•com>
Cc: git@vger•kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] git-merge: mutually match SYNOPSIS and "usage".
Date: Tue, 07 Oct 2014 14:31:31 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <xmqq1tqjefd8.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87bnpnsjrw.fsf@osv.gnss.ru> (Sergey Organov's message of "Wed, 08 Oct 2014 00:32:35 +0400")

Sergey Organov <sorganov@gmail•com> writes:

> Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox•com> writes:
> ...
> I was looking at the merge.c code, and that's how it seems to work. You
> can get new semantics without -m, and you can't get old semantics with
> -m, isn't it? It looks like the set of descriptions I produced is
> formally correct.

The thing is, with "-m <msg>" we will never fall into the
traditional syntax, hence "git merge -m <msg> <msg> HEAD <commit>"
appear to be allowed with "git merge [options] <msg> HEAD
<commit>...", but it is not.

And the inverse is not true (an obvious example is "git merge
$branch", even though it does not have "-m <msg>" it uses the modern
& common.

So the updated SYNOPSIS is not really helping.

>> In other words, I agree with your motivation to call for attention
>> that the command behaves differently with and without "-m", but I do
>> not think that part of the change in this patch achieves it well.
>
> Any particular suggestion?

I was going to suggest "explain how the traditional syntax is
triggered in the DESCRIPTION section", but it turns out that we
already do that.

      The second syntax (<msg> HEAD <commit>...) is supported for
      historical reasons. Do not use it from the command line or in
      new scripts. It is the same as git merge -m <msg> <commit>....

Strictly speaking, I think it is not qute "the same"---I recall
vaguely that it broke tests if you replace the traditional-style
invocation in 'git pull' with the -m <msg> syntax, but I do not have
details handy; you may want to try it out if you are interested.

So I would think

	SYNOPSIS
        	git merge [options] <commit>...
		git merge [options] <msg> HEAD <commit>...
                git merge --abort

should be sufficient, possibly with some clarification on "The
second syntax" paragraph in the DESCRIPTION section.

next prev parent reply	other threads:[~2014-10-07 21:31 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-10-07 11:54 [PATCH] git-merge: mutually match SYNOPSIS and "usage" Sergey Organov
2014-10-07 18:34 ` Junio C Hamano
2014-10-07 20:32   ` Sergey Organov
2014-10-07 21:31     ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2014-10-08 10:12       ` Sergey Organov

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=xmqq1tqjefd8.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com \
    --to=gitster@pobox$(echo .)com \
    --cc=git@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
    --cc=sorganov@gmail$(echo .)com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox