Re: [RFC v2 11/16] Add explanatory comment for transport-helpers refs mapping.

From: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
Date: Jul 30, 2012, 19:15 UTC
Message-ID: <20120730191553.GC9564@burratino>
In-Reply-To: <7vwr1lqhd7.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>

Junio C Hamano wrote:

> Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com> writes:

Show 5 quoted lines

>>> +	/*
>>> +	 * If the remote helper advertised the "refspec" capability,
>>> +	 * it will have the written result of the import to the refs
>
> perhaps s/will have the written result of/would have written result of/?

That would sound like 'If the remote helper advertised the "refspec" capability, it would have written the result of the import to the refs, but it didn't, so...', so I think "will" is the right tense. But 'will have the written' is awkward. How about:

	 * The fast-import stream of a remote helper advertising the
	 * "refspec" capability writes to the refs named after the right
	 * hand side of the first refspec matching each ref we were
	 * fetching.
	 *
	 * (If no "refspec" capability is specified, for historical
	 * reasons the default is *:*.)
	 *
	 * Store the result in to_fetch[i].old_sha1. [...]