From: Martin <git@mfriebe.de>
Date: Sun, 11 Jul 2021 10:24:10 GMT
Subject: Re: PATCH: improve git switch documentation
Message-ID: <4cb46126-c816-065f-9052-8ef392c7778b@mfriebe.de>
In-Reply-To: <87sg0lfayd.fsf@osv.gnss.ru>

On 11/07/2021 11:37, Sergey Organov wrote:
> Martin <git@mfriebe.de> writes:
> I did suggest a wording in that post:
> 
> "Allows to reuse <branch-name>. Commits from the former branch may
> become unreferenced."
> 
> Another one could be:
> 
> "Allows to reuse <branch-name>. Commits from the former branch could be
> lost."
> 

"lost" is perfect for me.

"could be" is a good replacement for "may". It much stronger points to 
"this may or may not be"

"could be"  should definitely be used.

Afaik many tech docs try to avoid "may", "can", "must not"....