Re: [PATCHv2] Update gitworkflows man page to include release workflow
- From
- Raman Gupta <rocketraman@fastmail.fm>
- Date
- Nov 12, 2009, 16:54 UTC
- Message-ID
- <4AFC3DDE.7000202@fastmail.fm>
- In-Reply-To
- <200911120910.57091.trast@student.ethz.ch>
Thomas Rast wrote:
Show 17 quoted lines
> Raman Gupta wrote: >> Junio C Hamano wrote: >>> Please set the tone straight. If this is to suggest various possible >>> workflows in general vague terms, "may use" would be good. If this is to >>> precisely describe what I do, then there won't be "you could do this, or >>> you could do that." Your "may use" suggests the former, but the commit >>> log message claims the latter. Which document are you writing? >> Ok. The current document is inconsistent. In places it uses "the >> maintainer" and in other places it uses "you". In any case, it seems >> that the "maintainer" here is not "Junio Hamano" -- rather, it is the >> reader. >> >> Let me create a separate (and first) cleanup patch to fix the existing >> inconsistencies in this man page. I would prefer to use the pronoun >> "you" consistently as also suggested by Thomas Rast. > > Well, I'm not sure if this is also in reply to my comment
It was mostly, yes.
Show 7 quoted lines
> } The current gitworkflows is mostly formulated in the imperative, [...] > } or by directly describing the tools in the third person, [...] > > but note that I do not consider the current form to be inconsistent > (though you may of course convince me otherwise). It addresses the > presumed user with "you", which is not always the maintainer. For > example, when talking about patch submission we have
You're right, upon re-reading the original man page I realized it is consistent.
Thanks, Raman