From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox•com>
To: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco•com>
Cc: Michael J Gruber <git@drmicha•warpmail.net>,
Git List <git@vger•kernel.org>, Prem <prem.muthedath@gmail•com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] git-push.txt: document the behavior of --repo
Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2015 12:55:58 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <xmqqsieufwv5.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAPig+cR-45NzCK5mu9d=1o8nss54ShYn1Snexx5rT+En8XeMcA@mail.gmail.com> (Eric Sunshine's message of "Wed, 28 Jan 2015 15:30:18 -0500")
Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco•com> writes:
> On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 3:12 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox•com> wrote:
>> Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco•com> writes:
>>
>>>> + This option is equivalent to the <repository> argument; the latter
>>>> + wins if both are specified.
>>>
>>> To what does "latter" refer in this case? (I presume it means the
>>> standalone <repository> argument, though the text feels ambiguous.)
>>>
>>> Also, both the standalone argument and the right-hand-side of --repo=
>>> are spelled "<repository>", so there may be potential for confusion
>>> when talking about <repository> (despite the subsequent "argument").
>>> Perhaps qualifying it as "_standalone_ <repository> argument" might
>>> help.
>>
>> I didn't find that "latter" too hard to understand (I admit that my
>> reading stuttered there, though).
>>
>> I do not think saying "standalone <repository> argument" there would
>> help very much, because there is no mention of "standalone" around
>> there. The earlier part of the sentence mentions "option" and
>> "argument", so "the repository specified as an argument is used if
>> both this option and an argument are given" or something?
>
> Yes, that addresses the two (minor) ambiguities and sounds fine.
> Thinking about it afterward, I came up with this:
>
> This option is equivalent to the <repository> argument. If both
> are specified, the command-line argument takes precedence.
Sure, even though I felt a similar stuttering at around 'both' when
reading it for the first time.
Let me amend using your phrasing and requeue.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-01-28 21:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-01-26 8:21 git push --repo option not working as described in git manual Prem
2015-01-26 16:31 ` Junio C Hamano
2015-01-27 12:35 ` [PATCH] git-push.txt: document the behavior of --repo Michael J Gruber
2015-01-27 19:30 ` Junio C Hamano
2015-01-27 22:07 ` Eric Sunshine
2015-01-28 16:20 ` Prem Muthedath
2015-01-28 20:12 ` Junio C Hamano
2015-01-28 20:30 ` Eric Sunshine
2015-01-28 20:55 ` 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=xmqqsieufwv5.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com \
--to=gitster@pobox$(echo .)com \
--cc=git@drmicha$(echo .)warpmail.net \
--cc=git@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
--cc=prem.muthedath@gmail$(echo .)com \
--cc=sunshine@sunshineco$(echo .)com \
/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