Subject: Re: [PATCH] git-push.txt: document the behavior of --repo

From: Junio C Hamano <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2015 12:55:58 -0800

Eric Sunshine <[email-masked]> writes:

> On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 3:12 PM, Junio C Hamano <[email-masked]> wrote:
>> Eric Sunshine <[email-masked]> 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.