Re: [PATCH] Documentation: Simplify git-rev-parse's example

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Jun 19, 2008, 23:28 UTC
Message-ID: <7v63s5rolr.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org>
In-Reply-To: <D6812FD2-F61D-4813-95B4-4FCCDE35C418@ai.rug.nl>

Pieter de Bie <pdebie@ai.rug.nl> writes:

Show 18 quoted lines

> On 19 jun 2008, at 21:33, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
>>> How is this a vast improvement?
>>>
>>> I could see that inverting it top-to-bottom would
>>> be more consistent with gitk or show-branch output.
>>> Your example doesn't have a 3-parent commit, though,
>>> and it isn't _that_ much simpler otherwise...
>>>
>>> So this is really better _how_?
>>>
>>> Oh, right, of course.  It removes my name.  Got it. :-)
>>
>> I agree that the patch should have just flipped the tree upside down
>> without changing the shape of the history the section talks about.
>
> I tried to make it less of a monster while still keeping examples of
> all possibilities, which is why I removed two of the nodes.

I do not care _that_ deeply myself, but judging from how often the word Octopus comes up on this list (even though I do not think we would want to especially encourage the practice), I think it is a disservice to drop an octopus from the section that teaches how to name a commit in an ancestry graph.