From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 04:10:34 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH] git push: remove incomplete options list from help text
Message-ID: <20091019041033.GB7170@coredump.intra.peff.net>
In-Reply-To: <20091019115412.6117@nanako3.lavabit.com>

On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 11:54:12AM +0900, Nanako Shiraishi wrote:

>  static const char * const push_usage[] = {
> -	"git push [--all | --mirror] [-n | --dry-run] [--porcelain] [--tags] [--receive-pack=<git-receive-pack>] [--repo=<repository>] [-f | --force] [-v] [<repository> <refspec>...]",
> +	"git push <options> [<repository> <refspec>...]",

This is a big improvement, IMO. We should probably standardize on when
to show options, and when to simply say <options>, and make sure every
program does the right thing. I am in favor of a short synopsis followed
by a list (as you do here) for both usage and for manpages. However, I
raised the question a few weeks ago and the response was slightly
negative:

  http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/129399/focus=129424

Probably few people read it, as it was buried deep in a thread. But
maybe we should settle on a rule like "short synopsis for usage, long
synopsis for manpage" or whatever people think is best.

Also, minor nit with your patch: should it be "[<options>]"?

-Peff