{"thread":{"id":"26891","subject":"[PATCH 00/10] Docs: git tag","startedAt":"2011-03-28T14:35:20Z","lastAt":"2011-03-29T13:59:48Z","messageCount":17,"participants":["Michael Witten","Eric Raible","Junio C Hamano","Michael J Gruber"],"isPatch":true,"patchVersion":1,"patchTotal":10},"messages":[{"id":"164444","messageId":"1301327622-8595-2-git-send-email-mfwitten@gmail.com","threadId":"26891","inReplyTo":"1301327622-8595-1-git-send-email-mfwitten@gmail.com","subject":"[PATCH 01/10] Docs: git tag: Add `the'","fromName":"Michael Witten","fromEmail":"mfwitten@gmail.com","sentAt":"2011-03-28T14:35:20Z","receivedAt":"2011-03-28T14:35:20Z","isPatch":true,"sender":{"key":"mfwitten@gmail.com","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/597101?v=4"},"body":"Signed-off-by: Michael Witten \n---\n Documentation/git-tag.txt | 2 +-\n 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)\n\ndiff --git a/Documentation/git-tag.txt b/Documentation/git-tag.txt\nindex 61263fa..7844ff1 100644\n--- a/Documentation/git-tag.txt\n+++ b/Documentation/git-tag.txt\n@@ -165,7 +165,7 @@ You can test which tag you have by doing\n \n which should return 0123456789abcdef.. if you have the new version.\n \n-Sorry for inconvenience.\n+Sorry for the inconvenience.\n ------------\n \n Does this seem a bit complicated? It *should* be. There is no\n-- \n1.7.4.18.g68fe8\n"},{"id":"164445","messageId":"1301327622-8595-3-git-send-email-mfwitten@gmail.com","threadId":"26891","inReplyTo":"1301327622-8595-1-git-send-email-mfwitten@gmail.com","subject":"[PATCH 02/10] Docs: git tag: peoples back -> people's backs","fromName":"Michael Witten","fromEmail":"mfwitten@gmail.com","sentAt":"2011-03-28T14:40:09Z","receivedAt":"2011-03-28T14:40:09Z","isPatch":true,"sender":{"key":"mfwitten@gmail.com","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/597101?v=4"},"body":"Signed-off-by: Michael Witten \n---\n Documentation/git-tag.txt | 2 +-\n 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)\n\ndiff --git a/Documentation/git-tag.txt b/Documentation/git-tag.txt\nindex 7844ff1..e276393 100644\n--- a/Documentation/git-tag.txt\n+++ b/Documentation/git-tag.txt\n@@ -169,7 +169,7 @@ Sorry for the inconvenience.\n ------------\n \n Does this seem a bit complicated? It *should* be. There is no\n-way that it would be correct to just \"fix\" it behind peoples\n+way that it would be correct to just \"fix\" it behind people's\n backs. People need to know that their tags might have been\n changed.\n \n-- \n1.7.4.18.g68fe8\n"},{"id":"164446","messageId":"1301327622-8595-4-git-send-email-mfwitten@gmail.com","threadId":"26891","inReplyTo":"1301327622-8595-1-git-send-email-mfwitten@gmail.com","subject":"[PATCH 03/10] Docs: git tag: Revise a paragraph.","fromName":"Michael Witten","fromEmail":"mfwitten@gmail.com","sentAt":"2011-03-28T14:49:45Z","receivedAt":"2011-03-28T14:49:45Z","isPatch":true,"sender":{"key":"mfwitten@gmail.com","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/597101?v=4"},"body":"Signed-off-by: Michael Witten \n---\n Documentation/git-tag.txt | 7 ++++---\n 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)\n\ndiff --git a/Documentation/git-tag.txt b/Documentation/git-tag.txt\nindex e276393..68eebee 100644\n--- a/Documentation/git-tag.txt\n+++ b/Documentation/git-tag.txt\n@@ -189,9 +189,10 @@ the toplevel but not limited to them. Mere mortals when pulling\n from each other do not necessarily want to automatically get\n private anchor point tags from the other person.\n \n-You would notice \"please pull\" messages on the mailing list says\n-repo URL and branch name alone. This is designed to be easily\n-cut&pasted to a 'git fetch' command line:\n+Often, \"please pull\" messages on the mailing list just provide\n+two pieces of information: a repo URL and a branch name; this\n+is designed to be easily cut&pasted at the end of a 'git fetch'\n+command line:\n \n ------------\n Linus, please pull from\n-- \n1.7.4.18.g68fe8\n"},{"id":"164447","messageId":"1301327622-8595-5-git-send-email-mfwitten@gmail.com","threadId":"26891","inReplyTo":"1301327622-8595-1-git-send-email-mfwitten@gmail.com","subject":"[PATCH 04/10] Docs: git tag: other's -> the other person's","fromName":"Michael Witten","fromEmail":"mfwitten@gmail.com","sentAt":"2011-03-28T14:51:20Z","receivedAt":"2011-03-28T14:51:20Z","isPatch":true,"sender":{"key":"mfwitten@gmail.com","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/597101?v=4"},"body":"Signed-off-by: Michael Witten \n---\n Documentation/git-tag.txt | 4 ++--\n 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)\n\ndiff --git a/Documentation/git-tag.txt b/Documentation/git-tag.txt\nindex 68eebee..b348c3d 100644\n--- a/Documentation/git-tag.txt\n+++ b/Documentation/git-tag.txt\n@@ -208,8 +208,8 @@ becomes:\n $ git pull git://git..../proj.git master\n ------------\n \n-In such a case, you do not want to automatically follow other's\n-tags.\n+In such a case, you do not want to automatically follow the other\n+person's tags.\n \n One important aspect of git is it is distributed, and being\n distributed largely means there is no inherent \"upstream\" or\n-- \n1.7.4.18.g68fe8\n"},{"id":"164450","messageId":"1301327622-8595-6-git-send-email-mfwitten@gmail.com","threadId":"26891","inReplyTo":"1301327622-8595-1-git-send-email-mfwitten@gmail.com","subject":"[PATCH 05/10] Docs: git tag: Streamline a sentence.","fromName":"Michael Witten","fromEmail":"mfwitten@gmail.com","sentAt":"2011-03-28T14:53:12Z","receivedAt":"2011-03-28T14:53:12Z","isPatch":true,"sender":{"key":"mfwitten@gmail.com","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/597101?v=4"},"body":"Signed-off-by: Michael Witten \n---\n Documentation/git-tag.txt | 4 ++--\n 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)\n\ndiff --git a/Documentation/git-tag.txt b/Documentation/git-tag.txt\nindex b348c3d..9ec2715 100644\n--- a/Documentation/git-tag.txt\n+++ b/Documentation/git-tag.txt\n@@ -211,8 +211,8 @@ $ git pull git://git..../proj.git master\n In such a case, you do not want to automatically follow the other\n person's tags.\n \n-One important aspect of git is it is distributed, and being\n-distributed largely means there is no inherent \"upstream\" or\n+One important aspect of git is its distributed nature, which\n+largely means there is no inherent \"upstream\" or\n \"downstream\" in the system. On the face of it, the above\n example might seem to indicate that the tag namespace is owned\n by upper echelon of people and tags only flow downwards, but\n-- \n1.7.4.18.g68fe8\n"},{"id":"164448","messageId":"1301327622-8595-7-git-send-email-mfwitten@gmail.com","threadId":"26891","inReplyTo":"1301327622-8595-1-git-send-email-mfwitten@gmail.com","subject":"[PATCH 06/10] Docs: git tag: Add missing 'the'","fromName":"Michael Witten","fromEmail":"mfwitten@gmail.com","sentAt":"2011-03-28T14:55:37Z","receivedAt":"2011-03-28T14:55:37Z","isPatch":true,"sender":{"key":"mfwitten@gmail.com","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/597101?v=4"},"body":"Signed-off-by: Michael Witten \n---\n Documentation/git-tag.txt | 2 +-\n 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)\n\ndiff --git a/Documentation/git-tag.txt b/Documentation/git-tag.txt\nindex 9ec2715..73f340b 100644\n--- a/Documentation/git-tag.txt\n+++ b/Documentation/git-tag.txt\n@@ -215,7 +215,7 @@ One important aspect of git is its distributed nature, which\n largely means there is no inherent \"upstream\" or\n \"downstream\" in the system. On the face of it, the above\n example might seem to indicate that the tag namespace is owned\n-by upper echelon of people and tags only flow downwards, but\n+by the upper echelon of people and that tags only flow downwards, but\n that is not the case. It only shows that the usage pattern\n determines who are interested in whose tags.\n \n-- \n1.7.4.18.g68fe8\n"},{"id":"164452","messageId":"1301327622-8595-8-git-send-email-mfwitten@gmail.com","threadId":"26891","inReplyTo":"1301327622-8595-1-git-send-email-mfwitten@gmail.com","subject":"[PATCH 07/10] Docs: git tag: Use 'who' again","fromName":"Michael Witten","fromEmail":"mfwitten@gmail.com","sentAt":"2011-03-28T14:58:05Z","receivedAt":"2011-03-28T14:58:05Z","isPatch":true,"sender":{"key":"mfwitten@gmail.com","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/597101?v=4"},"body":"Also, remove an unnecessary parenthetical comment.\n\nSigned-off-by: Michael Witten \n---\n Documentation/git-tag.txt | 6 +++---\n 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)\n\ndiff --git a/Documentation/git-tag.txt b/Documentation/git-tag.txt\nindex 73f340b..695a224 100644\n--- a/Documentation/git-tag.txt\n+++ b/Documentation/git-tag.txt\n@@ -225,9 +225,9 @@ primarily interested in the networking part of the kernel\") who may\n have their own set of tags (e.g. \"this is the third release\n candidate from the networking group to be proposed for general\n consumption with 2.6.21 release\") to another circle of people\n-(e.g. \"people who integrate various subsystem improvements\").\n-The latter are usually not interested in the detailed tags used\n-internally in the former group (that is what \"internal\" means).\n+(e.g. \"people who integrate various subsystem improvements\") who\n+are usually not interested in the detailed tags used\n+internally in the former group.\n That is why it is desirable not to follow tags automatically in\n this case.\n \n-- \n1.7.4.18.g68fe8\n"},{"id":"164449","messageId":"1301327622-8595-9-git-send-email-mfwitten@gmail.com","threadId":"26891","inReplyTo":"1301327622-8595-1-git-send-email-mfwitten@gmail.com","subject":"[PATCH 08/10] Docs: git tag: Remove superfluous 'with'","fromName":"Michael Witten","fromEmail":"mfwitten@gmail.com","sentAt":"2011-03-28T14:59:32Z","receivedAt":"2011-03-28T14:59:32Z","isPatch":true,"sender":{"key":"mfwitten@gmail.com","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/597101?v=4"},"body":"Signed-off-by: Michael Witten \n---\n Documentation/git-tag.txt | 2 +-\n 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)\n\ndiff --git a/Documentation/git-tag.txt b/Documentation/git-tag.txt\nindex 695a224..0b24c87 100644\n--- a/Documentation/git-tag.txt\n+++ b/Documentation/git-tag.txt\n@@ -233,7 +233,7 @@ this case.\n \n It may well be that among networking people, they may want to\n exchange the tags internal to their group, but in that workflow\n-they are most likely tracking with each other's progress by\n+they are most likely tracking each other's progress by\n having remote-tracking branches. Again, the heuristic to automatically\n follow such tags is a good thing.\n \n-- \n1.7.4.18.g68fe8\n"},{"id":"164451","messageId":"1301327622-8595-10-git-send-email-mfwitten@gmail.com","threadId":"26891","inReplyTo":"1301327622-8595-1-git-send-email-mfwitten@gmail.com","subject":"[PATCH 09/10] Docs: git tag: Use semicolon","fromName":"Michael Witten","fromEmail":"mfwitten@gmail.com","sentAt":"2011-03-28T15:01:16Z","receivedAt":"2011-03-28T15:01:16Z","isPatch":true,"sender":{"key":"mfwitten@gmail.com","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/597101?v=4"},"body":"Signed-off-by: Michael Witten \n---\n Documentation/git-tag.txt | 2 +-\n 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)\n\ndiff --git a/Documentation/git-tag.txt b/Documentation/git-tag.txt\nindex 0b24c87..3dd78a0 100644\n--- a/Documentation/git-tag.txt\n+++ b/Documentation/git-tag.txt\n@@ -243,7 +243,7 @@ On Backdating Tags\n \n If you have imported some changes from another VCS and would like\n to add tags for major releases of your work, it is useful to be able\n-to specify the date to embed inside of the tag object. The data in\n+to specify the date to embed inside of the tag object; such data in\n the tag object affects, for example, the ordering of tags in the\n gitweb interface.\n \n-- \n1.7.4.18.g68fe8\n"},{"id":"164453","messageId":"1301327622-8595-11-git-send-email-mfwitten@gmail.com","threadId":"26891","inReplyTo":"1301327622-8595-1-git-send-email-mfwitten@gmail.com","subject":"[PATCH 10/10] Docs: git tag: Rewrite discussion of GIT_COMMITTER_DATE","fromName":"Michael Witten","fromEmail":"mfwitten@gmail.com","sentAt":"2011-03-28T15:11:49Z","receivedAt":"2011-03-28T15:11:49Z","isPatch":true,"sender":{"key":"mfwitten@gmail.com","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/597101?v=4"},"body":"Signed-off-by: Michael Witten \n---\n Documentation/git-tag.txt | 8 ++++----\n 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)\n\ndiff --git a/Documentation/git-tag.txt b/Documentation/git-tag.txt\nindex 3dd78a0..21dc06f 100644\n--- a/Documentation/git-tag.txt\n+++ b/Documentation/git-tag.txt\n@@ -248,16 +248,16 @@ the tag object affects, for example, the ordering of tags in the\n gitweb interface.\n \n To set the date used in future tag objects, set the environment\n-variable GIT_COMMITTER_DATE to one or more of the date and time. The\n-date and time can be specified in a number of ways; the most common\n-is \"YYYY-MM-DD HH:MM\".\n+variable GIT_COMMITTER_DATE (see the later discussion of possible\n+values; the most common form is \"YYYY-MM-DD HH:MM\").\n \n-An example follows.\n+For example:\n \n ------------\n $ GIT_COMMITTER_DATE=\"2006-10-02 10:31\" git tag -s v1.0.1\n ------------\n \n+include::date-formats.txt[]\n \n SEE ALSO\n --------\n-- \n1.7.4.18.g68fe8\n"},{"id":"164443","messageId":"1301327622-8595-1-git-send-email-mfwitten@gmail.com","threadId":"26891","inReplyTo":null,"subject":"[PATCH 00/10] Docs: git tag","fromName":"Michael Witten","fromEmail":"mfwitten@gmail.com","sentAt":"2011-03-28T15:32:06Z","receivedAt":"2011-03-28T15:32:06Z","isPatch":true,"sender":{"key":"mfwitten@gmail.com","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/597101?v=4"},"body":"Small patches fixing up the `git tag' docs.\n\nMichael Witten (10):\n Docs: git tag: Add `the'\n Docs: git tag: peoples back -> people's backs\n Docs: git tag: Revise a paragraph.\n Docs: git tag: other's -> the other person's\n Docs: git tag: Streamline a sentence.\n Docs: git tag: Add missing 'the'\n Docs: git tag: Use 'who' again\n Docs: git tag: Remove superfluous 'with'\n Docs: git tag: Use semicolon\n Docs: git tag: Rewrite discussion of GIT_COMMITTER_DATE\n\n Documentation/git-tag.txt | 39 ++++++++++++++++++++-------------------\n 1 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)\n\n-- \n1.7.4.18.g68fe8\n"},{"id":"164473","messageId":"4D90CD1B.4030906@nextest.com","threadId":"26891","inReplyTo":"1301327622-8595-3-git-send-email-mfwitten@gmail.com","subject":"Re: [PATCH 02/10] Docs: git tag: peoples back -> people's backs","fromName":"Eric Raible","fromEmail":"raible@nextest.com","sentAt":"2011-03-28T18:02:03Z","receivedAt":"2011-03-28T18:02:03Z","isPatch":true,"sender":{"key":"raible@nextest.com","avatar":null},"body":"On 11:59 AM, Michael Witten wrote:\n> Signed-off-by: Michael Witten \n> ---\n> Documentation/git-tag.txt | 2 +-\n> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)\n> \n> diff --git a/Documentation/git-tag.txt b/Documentation/git-tag.txt\n> index 7844ff1..e276393 100644\n> --- a/Documentation/git-tag.txt\n> +++ b/Documentation/git-tag.txt\n> @@ -169,7 +169,7 @@ Sorry for the inconvenience.\n> ------------\n> \n> Does this seem a bit complicated? It *should* be. There is no\n> -way that it would be correct to just \"fix\" it behind peoples\n> +way that it would be correct to just \"fix\" it behind people's\n> backs. People need to know that their tags might have been\n> changed.\n\ns/people's/peoples'/\n\nOr probably even better:\n\n/behind people's backs/automatically/\n"},{"id":"164474","messageId":"7v8vvzyvdi.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org","threadId":"26891","inReplyTo":"1301327622-8595-1-git-send-email-mfwitten@gmail.com","subject":"Re: [PATCH 00/10] Docs: git tag","fromName":"Junio C Hamano","fromEmail":"gitster@pobox.com","sentAt":"2011-03-28T18:04:25Z","receivedAt":"2011-03-28T18:04:25Z","isPatch":true,"sender":{"key":"gitster@pobox.com","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/54884?v=4"},"body":"Michael Witten writes:\n\n> Small patches fixing up the `git tag' docs.\n>\n> Michael Witten (10):\n> Docs: git tag: Add `the'\n> Docs: git tag: peoples back -> people's backs\n> Docs: git tag: Revise a paragraph.\n> Docs: git tag: other's -> the other person's\n> Docs: git tag: Streamline a sentence.\n> Docs: git tag: Add missing 'the'\n> Docs: git tag: Use 'who' again\n> Docs: git tag: Remove superfluous 'with'\n> Docs: git tag: Use semicolon\n> Docs: git tag: Rewrite discussion of GIT_COMMITTER_DATE\n\nThanks; all looked sensible changes, except for 7/10 which I somehow find\nthe original is more readable than the new text, partly because the\nsentences are shorter but more importantly because the two sentences make\ntwo separate assertions (the first is about what \"one-shot\" pull means,\nthe second is about why automatic tag following is not desired in that\nsituation).\n"},{"id":"164519","messageId":"AANLkTinNb+GxEFDs_+KQvRyt4N=WrDmncUnbaCqAnAqM@mail.gmail.com","threadId":"26891","inReplyTo":"4D90CD1B.4030906@nextest.com","subject":"Re: [PATCH 02/10] Docs: git tag: peoples back -> people's backs","fromName":"Michael Witten","fromEmail":"mfwitten@gmail.com","sentAt":"2011-03-29T02:02:56Z","receivedAt":"2011-03-29T02:02:56Z","isPatch":true,"sender":{"key":"mfwitten@gmail.com","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/597101?v=4"},"body":"On Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 13:02, Eric Raible wrote:\n> On 11:59 AM, Michael Witten wrote:\n>> Signed-off-by: Michael Witten \n>> ---\n>>  Documentation/git-tag.txt |    2 +-\n>>  1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)\n>>\n>> diff --git a/Documentation/git-tag.txt b/Documentation/git-tag.txt\n>> index 7844ff1..e276393 100644\n>> --- a/Documentation/git-tag.txt\n>> +++ b/Documentation/git-tag.txt\n>> @@ -169,7 +169,7 @@ Sorry for the inconvenience.\n>>  ------------\n>>\n>>  Does this seem a bit complicated?  It *should* be. There is no\n>> -way that it would be correct to just \"fix\" it behind peoples\n>> +way that it would be correct to just \"fix\" it behind people's\n>>  backs. People need to know that their tags might have been\n>>  changed.\n>\n> s/people's/peoples'/\n\nActually, \"people\" is already plural, and thus \"people's\" is the\ncorrect possessive form (as with \"women\" and \"women's\"); \"peoples\", on\nthe other hand, means diffent groups of people. For instance:\n\n There are many people in China.\n\n Each of the various peoples in China has\n its own language; Hokkien is the language\n of my particular people.\n\nAt least that's how I know the usage.\n\nHow about changing it to \"behind a person's back\"? Perhaps the whole\ninformal tone is what needs to be changed.\n\n> Or probably even better:\n>\n> /behind people's backs/automatically/\n\nI don't feel that the word \"automatically\" sufficiently conveys the\nunexpected nature of such an event.\n"},{"id":"164520","messageId":"AANLkTi=wEp40mx=g=MhUYSjJN=cF+H+GEvbFyaV_yrot@mail.gmail.com","threadId":"26891","inReplyTo":"7v8vvzyvdi.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org","subject":"Re: [PATCH 00/10] Docs: git tag","fromName":"Michael Witten","fromEmail":"mfwitten@gmail.com","sentAt":"2011-03-29T02:06:08Z","receivedAt":"2011-03-29T02:06:08Z","isPatch":true,"sender":{"key":"mfwitten@gmail.com","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/597101?v=4"},"body":"On Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 13:04, Junio C Hamano wrote:\n> Michael Witten writes:\n>\n>> Small patches fixing up the `git tag' docs.\n>>\n>> Michael Witten (10):\n>>   Docs: git tag: Add `the'\n>>   Docs: git tag: peoples back -> people's backs\n>>   Docs: git tag: Revise a paragraph.\n>>   Docs: git tag: other's -> the other person's\n>>   Docs: git tag: Streamline a sentence.\n>>   Docs: git tag: Add missing 'the'\n>>   Docs: git tag: Use 'who' again\n>>   Docs: git tag: Remove superfluous 'with'\n>>   Docs: git tag: Use semicolon\n>>   Docs: git tag: Rewrite discussion of GIT_COMMITTER_DATE\n>\n> Thanks; all looked sensible changes, except for 7/10 which I somehow find\n> the original is more readable than the new text, partly because the\n> sentences are shorter but more importantly because the two sentences make\n> two separate assertions (the first is about what \"one-shot\" pull means,\n> the second is about why automatic tag following is not desired in that\n> situation).\n\nFair enough.\n"},{"id":"164531","messageId":"4D917B5E.1000600@drmicha.warpmail.net","threadId":"26891","inReplyTo":"7v8vvzyvdi.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org","subject":"Re: [PATCH 00/10] Docs: git tag","fromName":"Michael J Gruber","fromEmail":"git@drmicha.warpmail.net","sentAt":"2011-03-29T06:25:34Z","receivedAt":"2011-03-29T06:25:34Z","isPatch":true,"sender":{"key":"git@grubix.eu","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/233215?v=4"},"body":"Junio C Hamano venit, vidit, dixit 28.03.2011 20:04:\n> Michael Witten writes:\n> \n>> Small patches fixing up the `git tag' docs.\n>>\n>> Michael Witten (10):\n>> Docs: git tag: Add `the'\n>> Docs: git tag: peoples back -> people's backs\n>> Docs: git tag: Revise a paragraph.\n>> Docs: git tag: other's -> the other person's\n>> Docs: git tag: Streamline a sentence.\n>> Docs: git tag: Add missing 'the'\n>> Docs: git tag: Use 'who' again\n>> Docs: git tag: Remove superfluous 'with'\n>> Docs: git tag: Use semicolon\n>> Docs: git tag: Rewrite discussion of GIT_COMMITTER_DATE\n> \n> Thanks; all looked sensible changes, except for 7/10 which I somehow find\n> the original is more readable than the new text, partly because the\n> sentences are shorter but more importantly because the two sentences make\n> two separate assertions (the first is about what \"one-shot\" pull means,\n> the second is about why automatic tag following is not desired in that\n> situation).\n\nLooked mostly sensible to me (and I share Junio's view on 7), too,\nalthough I probably would have changed \"other's\" simply to \"others'\".\n\nAnd yes, while I like the dramatic sound of \"behind peoples' backs\",\nyou're absolutely right with \"people's\", of course:)\n\nThose 10 patches could have been 1 actually, they are really divided\ninto atoms (which is not bad per se) even though they all fall under\n\"cosmetic language corrections and improvements\" without any content\nchange nor restructuring.\n\nMichael\n"},{"id":"164573","messageId":"AANLkTi=U8amjCM7=bn2=ewJs2UpNG+D+sCKm4pPf4hP-@mail.gmail.com","threadId":"26891","inReplyTo":"4D917B5E.1000600@drmicha.warpmail.net","subject":"Re: [PATCH 00/10] Docs: git tag","fromName":"Michael Witten","fromEmail":"mfwitten@gmail.com","sentAt":"2011-03-29T13:59:48Z","receivedAt":"2011-03-29T13:59:48Z","isPatch":true,"sender":{"key":"mfwitten@gmail.com","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/597101?v=4"},"body":"On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 01:25, Michael J Gruber\n wrote:\n> Junio C Hamano venit, vidit, dixit 28.03.2011 20:04:\n>> Michael Witten writes:\n>>\n>>> Small patches fixing up the `git tag' docs.\n>>>\n>>> Michael Witten (10):\n>>>   Docs: git tag: Add `the'\n>>>   Docs: git tag: peoples back -> people's backs\n>>>   Docs: git tag: Revise a paragraph.\n>>>   Docs: git tag: other's -> the other person's\n>>>   Docs: git tag: Streamline a sentence.\n>>>   Docs: git tag: Add missing 'the'\n>>>   Docs: git tag: Use 'who' again\n>>>   Docs: git tag: Remove superfluous 'with'\n>>>   Docs: git tag: Use semicolon\n>>>   Docs: git tag: Rewrite discussion of GIT_COMMITTER_DATE\n>>\n>> Thanks; all looked sensible changes, except for 7/10 which I somehow find\n>> the original is more readable than the new text, partly because the\n>> sentences are shorter but more importantly because the two sentences make\n>> two separate assertions (the first is about what \"one-shot\" pull means,\n>> the second is about why automatic tag following is not desired in that\n>> situation).\n>\n> Looked mostly sensible to me (and I share Junio's view on 7), too,\n> although I probably would have changed \"other's\" simply to \"others'\".\n\nI probably chose the singular variant for 2 reasons: I generally\nprefer singular renditions, and the sentence is referring to an\nexample of a pull-request from one individual.\n\nOn Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 01:25, Michael J Gruber\n wrote:\n> Those 10 patches could have been 1 actually, they are really divided\n> into atoms (which is not bad per se) even though they all fall under\n> \"cosmetic language corrections and improvements\" without any content\n> change nor restructuring.\n\nIt's always hard to tell what delineations will be appreciated.\nHowever, it's almost always the case that the smaller a patch is, the\nmore quickly it can be reviewed and approved (also, the smaller the\ndiff, the more meaningful the commit message), so I err on the side of\ntoo small; after all, it's generally much easier to squash than to\nsplit.\n\nOf course, I would have no problem if Junio ultimately saw fit to\nsquash some or all of them (with a note that such squashing has\noccurred).\n\nThanks for your input.\n"}]}