Re: [PATCH 4/7] merge,tag: describe -m just like commit

From: Michael J Gruber <git@drmicha.warpmail.net>
Date: Feb 15, 2011, 07:08 UTC
Message-ID: <4D5A267B.7070902@drmicha.warpmail.net>
In-Reply-To: <7v4o86s7km.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>

Junio C Hamano venit, vidit, dixit 14.02.2011 21:08:

Show 9 quoted lines

> Michael J Gruber <git@drmicha.warpmail.net> writes:
> 
>> This also removes the misleading "if any" which sounds as if omitting
>> "-m" would omit the commmit message. (It meant to mean "if a merge
>> commit is created at all".)
> 
> Hmph, then don't we want to keep that in your clearer form, i.e.
> 
> 	specify merge commit message (if a merge is created at all)

Well, any option is effective only in the case when the command succeeds
- "commit -m msg" specifies only a message when a commit is created at
all, etc. So, it usually is a trivial remark. It is slightly different
for merge because merge may succeed by doing a fast-forward without
creating a merge commit, which is why I wrote "merge commit message".
So, the parenthetical remark would have to be "if a non-ff merge commit
is created". I'm afraid "merge created" alone would not convey this.

> An option is by definition to _specify_ something, "specify" is a waste of
> space in a description of an option.  E.g. in patch 3/7, --template option
> is described as "directory from which templates will be used", and not
> "specify the directory from which...".

Oh yes, I tried to refrain from mixing other clean-up tasks with the unifying series, especially in the absence of (my knowledge about) an option "style guide". If "--foo bar" specifies that "bar" is used as "baz" then saying "--foo <BAR>: baz" is enough and c/should be the general rule. I'd be happy to incorporate this.

Michael