From: J. Bruce Fields <bfields@fieldses.org>
Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 00:18:48 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH] New git-seek command with documentation and test.
Message-ID: <20060224001848.GB21094@fieldses.org>
In-Reply-To: <87zmkhrf4y.wl%cworth@cworth.org>

On Thu, Feb 23, 2006 at 12:31:25PM -0800, Carl Worth wrote:
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/Documentation/git-seek.txt
> @@ -0,0 +1,44 @@
> +git-bisect(1)
> +=============

Oops.

> +When given a <revision>, git-seek updates the files in the working
> +tree to the state of the given revision. It will do this by performing
> +a checkout of <revision> to a new branch named "seek", or by resetting
> +the seek branch if it already exists.

I wonder if its a good idea to silently reset a branch named with a
short common word?

> +LONG_USAGE='git-seek provides a temporary excursion through the revision history.
> +
> +When given a <revision>, git-seek updates the files in the working
> +tree to the state of the given revision. It will do this by performing
> +a checkout of <revision> to a new branch named "seek", or by resetting
> +the seek branch if it already exists.

These long usage texts with language duplicated from the man pages seem
like they'd be asking for bit-rot, when an update happens in one place
but not the other.  I dunno.

--b.