{"thread":{"id":"27724","subject":"[PATCH] Documentation/revisions: Document shorthand","startedAt":"2011-06-28T22:09:20Z","lastAt":"2011-07-01T23:01:38Z","messageCount":3,"participants":["Johan Sageryd","Michael J Gruber"],"isPatch":true,"patchVersion":1,"patchTotal":null},"messages":[{"id":"170647","messageId":"1309298960-55011-1-git-send-email-j416@1616.se","threadId":"27724","inReplyTo":null,"subject":"[PATCH] Documentation/revisions: Document shorthand","fromName":"Johan Sageryd","fromEmail":"j416@1616.se","sentAt":"2011-06-28T22:09:20Z","receivedAt":"2011-06-28T22:09:20Z","isPatch":true,"sender":{"key":"j416@1616.se","avatar":"https://gravatar.com/avatar/6f6e58a7dd2d9a28b0111f07e105243262a9e6707426e5b6cc6f972d6c2a4b09?d=mp&s=160"},"body":"Signed-off-by: Johan Sageryd <j416@1616.se>\n---\n Documentation/revisions.txt |    2 +-\n 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)\n\ndiff --git a/Documentation/revisions.txt b/Documentation/revisions.txt\nindex b290b61..180ef5a 100644\n--- a/Documentation/revisions.txt\n+++ b/Documentation/revisions.txt\n@@ -105,7 +105,7 @@ the '$GIT_DIR/refs' directory or from the '$GIT_DIR/packed-refs' file.\n   commit object, following only the first parents.  I.e. '<rev>{tilde}3' is\n   equivalent to '<rev>{caret}{caret}{caret}' which is equivalent to\n   '<rev>{caret}1{caret}1{caret}1'.  See below for an illustration of\n-  the usage of this form.\n+  the usage of this form. '<rev>{tilde}' is a shorthand for '<rev>{tilde}1'.\n\n '<rev>{caret}\\{<type>\\}', e.g. 'v0.99.8{caret}\\{commit\\}'::\n   A suffix '{caret}' followed by an object type name enclosed in\n--\n1.7.6\n\n\nSorry; please use this instead. Same patch with correct from-address.\n\nThank you,\nJohan\n"},{"id":"170701","messageId":"4E0C2627.9040709@drmicha.warpmail.net","threadId":"27724","inReplyTo":"1309298960-55011-1-git-send-email-j416@1616.se","subject":"Re: [PATCH] Documentation/revisions: Document shorthand","fromName":"Michael J Gruber","fromEmail":"git@drmicha.warpmail.net","sentAt":"2011-06-30T07:30:47Z","receivedAt":"2011-06-30T07:30:47Z","isPatch":true,"sender":{"key":"git@grubix.eu","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/233215?v=4"},"body":"Johan Sageryd venit, vidit, dixit 29.06.2011 00:09:\n> Signed-off-by: Johan Sageryd <j416@1616.se>\n> ---\n>  Documentation/revisions.txt |    2 +-\n>  1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)\n> \n> diff --git a/Documentation/revisions.txt b/Documentation/revisions.txt\n> index b290b61..180ef5a 100644\n> --- a/Documentation/revisions.txt\n> +++ b/Documentation/revisions.txt\n> @@ -105,7 +105,7 @@ the '$GIT_DIR/refs' directory or from the '$GIT_DIR/packed-refs' file.\n>    commit object, following only the first parents.  I.e. '<rev>{tilde}3' is\n>    equivalent to '<rev>{caret}{caret}{caret}' which is equivalent to\n>    '<rev>{caret}1{caret}1{caret}1'.  See below for an illustration of\n> -  the usage of this form.\n> +  the usage of this form. '<rev>{tilde}' is a shorthand for '<rev>{tilde}1'.\n> \n>  '<rev>{caret}\\{<type>\\}', e.g. 'v0.99.8{caret}\\{commit\\}'::\n>    A suffix '{caret}' followed by an object type name enclosed in\n> --\n> 1.7.6\n> \n> \n> Sorry; please use this instead. Same patch with correct from-address.\n\nIf rev~ is meant to be documented usage (I thought rev^ to be preferred\nbut may be wrong) then we should make the descriptions of rev~<n> and\nrev^<n> more uniform.\n\nMichael\n"},{"id":"170759","messageId":"4E0E51D2.9070407@1616.se","threadId":"27724","inReplyTo":"4E0C2627.9040709@drmicha.warpmail.net","subject":"Re: [PATCH] Documentation/revisions: Document shorthand","fromName":"Johan Sageryd","fromEmail":"j416@1616.se","sentAt":"2011-07-01T23:01:38Z","receivedAt":"2011-07-01T23:01:38Z","isPatch":true,"sender":{"key":"j416@1616.se","avatar":"https://gravatar.com/avatar/6f6e58a7dd2d9a28b0111f07e105243262a9e6707426e5b6cc6f972d6c2a4b09?d=mp&s=160"},"body":"On 2011-06-30 09.30, Michael J Gruber wrote:\n> If rev~ is meant to be documented usage (I thought rev^ to be preferred\n> but may be wrong) then we should make the descriptions of rev~<n> and\n> rev^<n> more uniform.\n\n\nHello Michael,\n\nYes, I thought about this too, there is indeed room for improvement.\nHowever in that case we should also think about uniforming the\ndescriptions of for instance \"<refname>@{<n>}\", \"@{<n>}\", \"@{-<n>}\" in a\nsimilar way.\n\nThe current descriptions are in themselves quite clear and I didn't feel\nthe need to spend much time rewriting it all. But I do believe that we\nshould strive to document all possible syntax, preferred or not, and\nthat is the reason for me suggesting this patch. The more complete the\nbetter, optimising can be done at any time.\n\nJohan\n"}]}