From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2012 11:53:35 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Document 'git commit --no-edit' explicitly
Message-ID: <20121102115335.GA2598@sigill.intra.peff.net>
In-Reply-To: <1351852770-13897-1-git-send-email-Matthieu.Moy@imag.fr>

On Fri, Nov 02, 2012 at 11:39:30AM +0100, Matthieu Moy wrote:

> I was tempted to merge the paragraph with --edit::, but I thought this
> may add confusion. The use-cases for --edit and --no-edit are really
> different so I went for a separate paragraph, right below the --edit one.

Yeah, usually I think it would be better to keep the positive and
negative forms together, but the way you have done it does seem a lot
more clear to me. I think it is because the default flips based on other
options. So you would be stuck writing something like:

  -e, --edit::
          Edit the commit message using `$EDITOR`. This is the default
          unless the `-F`, `-m`, or `-C` options are used; in those
          cases, `-e` or `--edit` can be used to invoke the editor.
          Likewise, `--no-edit` can be used to suppress the editor when
          using an existing commit message. For example, `git commit
          --amend --no-edit` amends a commit without changing its commit
          message.

Your split reads much better, IMHO.

Thanks.

-Peff