From: Karl Hasselström <kha@treskal.com>
Date: Sat, 12 May 2007 13:56:44 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Document patch syntax.
Message-ID: <20070512135644.GA28039@diana.vm.bytemark.co.uk>
In-Reply-To: <20070512120704.22970.45140.stgit@gandelf.nowhere.earth>

On 2007-05-12 14:07:04 +0200, Yann Dirson wrote:

> +Patches in the stack are identified with a short name, which must be
> +unique in the stack.

s/a short name/short names/, maybe.

> +Patches in the current stack are just refered to by their name.  Some
> +commands allow to specify a patch in another stack of the repository;

s/allow to/allow you to/. Or "allows one to", but I prefer the second
person here.

> +this is done by suffixing the patch name with a '@' sign followed by the
> +branch name (eg. 'thispatch@otherbranch').

s/a '@'/an '@'/; "'@'" begins with a vowel sound. :-)

> +A number of position in the stack related to the patch are also

s/position/positions/.

> +accessible through '//' suffixes.  For example, 'patch//top'' is
> +equivalent to 'patch', and 'patch//bottom' refers to the commit below
> +'patch' (ie. the patch below, or the stack base if this is the

s/ie./i.e./.

> +bottom-most patch).  Similarly ''//top.old'' and ''//bottom.old''

You use double quotes here, and single quotes above. What's the
distinction?

> +refer to the previous version of the patch (before the last
> +stglink:push[] or stglink:refresh[] operation).  When refering to the

s/refering/referring/.

Otherwise,

Acked-by: Karl Hasselström <kha@treskal.com>

Yes, I'm too picky.

-- 
Karl Hasselström, kha@treskal.com
      www.treskal.com/kalle