From: A Large Angry SCM Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2006 18:20:54 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH] Document git-runstatus Message-ID: <455F4F06.3090902@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: Sean wrote: > On Sat, 18 Nov 2006 16:04:43 +0100 > Rene Scharfe wrote: > >> git-status is a wrapper around git-runstatus that takes the same >> options as git-commit. It could have been named 'git-commit --dry-run'. > > What could be said in the docs as to when the use of one is preferred > over the other? > >>> All commands deserve a man page. >> Exactly. Even plumbers read manuals ;-). Well, me at least. > > Heh, I suppose you and Petr are right. It's just that in recent > discussions the great number of commands provided by Git is seen > as a UI problem. Thus having two commands that seem to do the > exact same thing gives more such pain for no gain. > > It's possible that plumbers should not be seen as "users" but > rather as coders capable of reading traditional text based > (non man-page) documentation for their purposes, and man pages > should only exist (or at least installed) for user level commands.