Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 16/36] doc txt & -h consistency: use "<options>", not "<options>..."

From: Junio C Hamano <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2022 14:43:00 -0700

Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason  <[email-masked]> writes:

> It's arguably more correct to say "[<option>...]" than either of these
> forms, but the vast majority of our documentation uses the
> "[<options>]" form to indicate an arbitrary number of options, let's
> do the same in these cases, which were the odd ones out.

Yeah, I agree these should say [<option>...] to mean zero-or-more of
them.  It may be fine, as long as it is clear that we use
[<options>] as a short-hand for it, though.