From: Michael J Gruber <git@drmicha.warpmail.net>
Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2010 19:41:54 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCHv3] git-rev-parse.txt: Document ":path" specifier
Message-ID: <4C27A982.9080006@drmicha.warpmail.net>
In-Reply-To: <7vocewff4b.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>

Junio C Hamano venit, vidit, dixit 27.06.2010 21:29:
> Thanks, will replace v2 with this versoin, but I suspect that swapping the
> two bullets in the existing documentation without anything else may be a
> simpler and easier-to-read alternative.
> 
> Orthogonal to this, it would probably make sense to give a simplest
> example in-line in the text, i.e.
> 
>  Documentation/git-rev-parse.txt |    6 +++---
>  1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/git-rev-parse.txt b/Documentation/git-rev-parse.txt
> index 8db600f..c03f31d 100644
> --- a/Documentation/git-rev-parse.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/git-rev-parse.txt
> @@ -291,12 +291,12 @@ the `$GIT_DIR/refs` directory or from the `$GIT_DIR/packed-refs` file.
>  
>  * A suffix ':' followed by a path; this names the blob or tree
>    at the given path in the tree-ish object named by the part
> -  before the colon.
> +  before the colon (e.g. "HEAD:README").

Yep, I think the whole discussion there is quite theoretical, often
describing symbols like slash and colon by words rather then writing
them out. That could be the topic for a more extensive rewrite. But I'm
often wondering whether git-rev-parse(1) really is the place for that,
or whether the whole revision syntax should into, say, gitrevision, to
go with gitglossary etc.

Michael