Re: [PATCHv2 3/3] revisions.txt: language improvements
- From
Michael J Gruber <git@drmicha.warpmail.net>
- Date
- Apr 3, 2011, 13:05 UTC
- Message-ID
- <4D987087.1050305@drmicha.warpmail.net>
- In-Reply-To
- <7vsju1eiff.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
Junio C Hamano venit, vidit, dixit 02.04.2011 00:05:
Show 34 quoted lines
> Michael J Gruber <git@drmicha.warpmail.net> writes: > >> Signed-off-by: Michael J Gruber <git@drmicha.warpmail.net> > > Thanks. > >> Documentation/revisions.txt | 68 +++++++++++++++++++++--------------------- >> 1 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/Documentation/revisions.txt b/Documentation/revisions.txt >> index 92bc662..25125c3 100644 >> --- a/Documentation/revisions.txt >> +++ b/Documentation/revisions.txt >> @@ -2,20 +2,20 @@ SPECIFYING REVISIONS >> -------------------- >> >> A revision parameter '<rev>' typically, but not necessarily, names a >> -commit object. They use what is called an 'extended SHA1' >> +commit object. It uses what is called an 'extended SHA1' >> syntax. Here are various ways to spell object names. The >> -ones listed near the end of this list are to name trees and >> +ones listed near the end of this list name trees and >> blobs contained in a commit. >> >> '<sha1>', e.g. 'dae86e1950b1277e545cee180551750029cfe735', 'dae86e':: >> The full SHA1 object name (40-byte hexadecimal string), or >> - a substring of such that is unique within the repository. >> + a substring that is unique within the repository. > > Do we need to rephrase this a bit more, so that it would be clear that > "e86e1950b" is not an abbreviated object name, even though it is a > substring and may be unique within the repository? > > Perhaps "a prefix of such a full SHA-1 object name that is unique..."?
Yes, definitely, I missed that.
Show 12 quoted lines
>
>> @@ -79,8 +79,8 @@ the '$GIT_DIR/refs' directory or from the '$GIT_DIR/packed-refs' file.
>>
>> '@\{<n>\}', e.g. '@\{1\}'::
>> You can use the '@' construct with an empty ref part to get at a
>> + reflog of the current branch. For example, if you are on
>> + branch 'blabla' then '@\{1\}' means the same as 'blabla@\{1\}'.
>
> Is that "a reflog of the current branch", or because there is only one
> reflog, should it be "the reflog of the current branch"? Ah, we mean one
> entry in the reflog (an entry of the reflog of the current branch), so
> this probably is Ok."reflog entry of the..." would be clearer, yes.
Show 9 quoted lines
> >> @@ -133,8 +133,8 @@ the '$GIT_DIR/refs' directory or from the '$GIT_DIR/packed-refs' file. >> a commit whose commit message matches the specified regular expression. >> This name returns the youngest matching commit which is >> reachable from any ref. If the commit message starts with a >> + '!' you have to repeat that; the special sequence ':/!', >> + followed by something else than '!', is reserved for now. > > Hmm, shouldn't it be "something OTHER than" instead?
I think both are correct, "else" is maybe slightly more American/colloquial in this context. I'd be happy with both.
> > Grammar is hard; thanks for cleaning them up. >
I too :)