{"thread":{"id":"531","subject":"[PATCH 0/2] core-git documentation update","startedAt":"2005-05-08T17:22:41Z","lastAt":"2005-05-08T23:35:55Z","messageCount":6,"participants":["David Greaves","Junio C Hamano"],"isPatch":true,"patchVersion":1,"patchTotal":2},"messages":[{"id":"2781","messageId":"427E4AE1.2040105@dgreaves.com","threadId":"531","inReplyTo":null,"subject":"[PATCH 0/2] core-git documentation update","fromName":"David Greaves","fromEmail":"david@dgreaves.com","sentAt":"2005-05-08T17:22:41Z","receivedAt":"2005-05-08T17:22:41Z","isPatch":true,"sender":{"key":"david@dgreaves.com","avatar":"https://gravatar.com/avatar/ca67bad50999edcdd137c9a65da2381557d175bea99ae956afdabc5785e42b79?d=mp&s=160"},"body":"Hi Linus, Junio\n\nHere's an update of the core-git docs. I haven't changed the content -\njust the format.\n\n1/2 was just sorting the core-git into alphabetical order.\n2/2 is a complete reformat to asciidoc format. This includes a splitter\nto create individual txt, html and man pages.\n\n\nDavid\n\n-- \n\n"},{"id":"2806","messageId":"7vhdhd5wzm.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net","threadId":"531","inReplyTo":"427E4AE1.2040105@dgreaves.com","subject":"Re: [PATCH 0/2] core-git documentation update","fromName":"Junio C Hamano","fromEmail":"junkio@cox.net","sentAt":"2005-05-08T19:38:37Z","receivedAt":"2005-05-08T19:38:37Z","isPatch":true,"sender":{"key":"gitster@pobox.com","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/54884?v=4"},"body":"Quick question.  Is this against the tip of Linus tree?\n\n"},{"id":"2817","messageId":"7vd5s15up8.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net","threadId":"531","inReplyTo":"427E4AE1.2040105@dgreaves.com","subject":"Re: [PATCH 0/2] core-git documentation update","fromName":"Junio C Hamano","fromEmail":"junkio@cox.net","sentAt":"2005-05-08T20:28:03Z","receivedAt":"2005-05-08T20:28:03Z","isPatch":true,"sender":{"key":"gitster@pobox.com","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/54884?v=4"},"body":"David, thanks for taking time to update the document.  I ended\nup hand merging your two patches since I had a bit more\ndocumentation updates in git-jc tree, so I'd like you to\nproofread the result.  \n\nIt is my understanding that if I have a correct patch result\nfrom your patch 1 and patch 2, I can throw away this message:\n\n    Subject: [FILES] core-git documentation update\n\nAm I correct?\n\nI intend to keep not-so-controvercial stuff in git-jc tree, so\nthat when Linus returns he can pull from it instead of patching\nfrom a pile of e-mails, potentially risking to leave good stuff\nin his mailbox during that process.\n\nThe following diff is between:\n\n    - Linus tree with two patches from you\n    + The result of my hand merge, which I intend to ask Linus\n      to pull when he returns.\n\nThanks.\n---\n\n# - 2: As Greaves\n# + (working tree)\n--- a/Documentation/core-git.txt\n+++ b/Documentation/core-git.txt\n@@ -473,7 +473,7 @@ git-diff-cache - Compares content and mo\n \n SYNOPSIS\n --------\n-'git-diff-cache' [-p] [-r] [-z] [--cached] <tree-ish>\n+'git-diff-cache' [-p] [-r] [-z] [-m] [--cached] <tree-ish>\n \n DESCRIPTION\n -----------\n@@ -500,6 +500,12 @@ OPTIONS\n --cached::\n \tdo not consider the on-disk file at all\n \n+-m::\n+\tBy default, files recorded in the index but not checked\n+\tout are reported as deleted.  This flag makes\n+\tgit-diff-cache say that all non-checked-out files are up\n+\tto date.\n+\n Output format\n -------------\n include::diff-format.txt[]\n@@ -1515,7 +1521,7 @@ git-update-cache - Modifies the index or\n SYNOPSIS\n --------\n 'git-update-cache'\n-\t     [--add] [--remove] [--refresh]\n+\t     [--add] [--remove] [--refresh] [--replace]\n \t     [--ignore-missing]\n \t     [--force-remove <file>]\n \t     [--cacheinfo <mode> <object> <file>]\\*\n@@ -1556,6 +1562,14 @@ OPTIONS\n \tRemove the file from the index even when the working directory\n \tstill has such a file.\n \n+--replace::\n+\tBy default, when a file `path` exists in the index,\n+\tgit-update-cache refuses an attempt to add `path/file`.\n+\tSimilarly if a file `path/file` exists, a file `path`\n+\tcannot be added.  With --replace flag, existing entries\n+\tthat conflicts with the entry being added are\n+\tautomatically removed with warning messages.\n+\n --::\n \tDo not interpret any more arguments as options.\n \n\n\n"},{"id":"2822","messageId":"427E7E40.1020702@dgreaves.com","threadId":"531","inReplyTo":"7vhdhd5wzm.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net","subject":"Re: [PATCH 0/2] core-git documentation update","fromName":"David Greaves","fromEmail":"david@dgreaves.com","sentAt":"2005-05-08T21:01:52Z","receivedAt":"2005-05-08T21:01:52Z","isPatch":true,"sender":{"key":"david@dgreaves.com","avatar":"https://gravatar.com/avatar/ca67bad50999edcdd137c9a65da2381557d175bea99ae956afdabc5785e42b79?d=mp&s=160"},"body":"Junio C Hamano wrote:\n\n>Quick question.  Is this against the tip of Linus tree?\n>\n>\n>  \n>\nyes\n\n\n-- \n\n"},{"id":"2831","messageId":"427E83EA.2000104@dgreaves.com","threadId":"531","inReplyTo":"7vd5s15up8.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net","subject":"Re: [PATCH 0/2] core-git documentation update","fromName":"David Greaves","fromEmail":"david@dgreaves.com","sentAt":"2005-05-08T21:26:02Z","receivedAt":"2005-05-08T21:26:02Z","isPatch":true,"sender":{"key":"david@dgreaves.com","avatar":"https://gravatar.com/avatar/ca67bad50999edcdd137c9a65da2381557d175bea99ae956afdabc5785e42b79?d=mp&s=160"},"body":"Junio C Hamano wrote:\n\n>David, thanks for taking time to update the document.  I ended\n>up hand merging your two patches since I had a bit more\n>documentation updates in git-jc tree, so I'd like you to\n>proofread the result.\n>  \n>\nThis merged fine.\nPurely for editorial consistency I added \"\" around the command - see patch\n\nThe intention now was for me to go through Linus' HEAD and verify the\ndocs actually documented the HEAD.\nThen I think comparing the HEAD to jit-jc and preparing patches for that?\n\n>It is my understanding that if I have a correct patch result\n>from your patch 1 and patch 2, I can throw away this message:\n>\n>    Subject: [FILES] core-git documentation update\n>\n>Am I correct?\n>  \n>\nyes - that was just to assist people in reading the docs without having\nto apply patches etc etc.\n\n>I intend to keep not-so-controvercial stuff in git-jc tree, so\n>that when Linus returns he can pull from it instead of patching\n>from a pile of e-mails, potentially risking to leave good stuff\n>in his mailbox during that process.\n>  \n>\nI had hoped you'd pick this up in that manner - thanks\n\nDavid\nPS Removed Linus from cc\n\nAdd quotes for editorial consistency\n\nSigned-off-by: David Greaves <david@dgreaves.com>\n---\n\n\n\n\n\nDocumentation/core-git.txt: needs update\nIndex: Documentation/core-git.txt\n===================================================================\n--- 08cd7ce14ca4da7db37dce88e416e67b01f3452a/Documentation/core-git.txt  (mode:100644 sha1:e046119fcdd948dec81b11376ec9198e76a109af)\n+++ uncommitted/Documentation/core-git.txt  (mode:100644)\n@@ -503,7 +503,7 @@\n -m::\n \tBy default, files recorded in the index but not checked\n \tout are reported as deleted.  This flag makes\n-\tgit-diff-cache say that all non-checked-out files are up\n+\t\"git-diff-cache\" say that all non-checked-out files are up\n \tto date.\n \n Output format\n"},{"id":"2841","messageId":"7v3bsx2sv8.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net","threadId":"531","inReplyTo":"427E83EA.2000104@dgreaves.com","subject":"Re: [PATCH 0/2] core-git documentation update","fromName":"Junio C Hamano","fromEmail":"junkio@cox.net","sentAt":"2005-05-08T23:35:55Z","receivedAt":"2005-05-08T23:35:55Z","isPatch":true,"sender":{"key":"gitster@pobox.com","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/54884?v=4"},"body":">>>>> \"DG\" == David Greaves <david@dgreaves.com> writes:\n\nDG> The intention now was for me to go through Linus' HEAD and verify the\nDG> docs actually documented the HEAD.\nDG> Then I think comparing the HEAD to jit-jc and preparing patches for that?\n\nThat one is up to you, but if your patches are against git-jc,\nit would make _my_ life simpler and hopefully would make merge\neasier for Linus when he returns.\n\nAfter he returns, it would probably not make much sense sending\npatch against git-jc, unless all of the following conditions\nhold true: (1) what is already merged to git-jc conflicts with\nwhat you are modifying, (2) all changes in git-jc are trivially\ncorrect and veriy likely to hit Linus tree without being\nrejected, and (3) Linus is too busy and lags behind git-jc.\n\n"}]}