From: Junio C Hamano Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2026 01:45:29 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/6] doc: add new gitmergeconflicts man page Message-ID: <87tsmucoqu.fsf@gitster.g> In-Reply-To: "Julia Evans" writes: Comments on a few more points. >> Is it deliberate to omit 'am -3' and 'checkout -m', perhaps in order >> to limit ourselves to most common ways to help new people by keeping >> the description to the absolute minimum? > > It's deliberate, we talked about that a bit in the discussion of the v1. > Can add a note in the commit message. Being a part of _the_ technical manual on Git, I would like to see us aim for completeness, and where we don't leave a note that the description is not complete. In this case, between Merge conflicts can happen during a `git merge`, `git rebase`, `git cherry-pick`, `git pull`, `git am -3`, `git checkout -m`, `git stash pop`, or `git revert`. that aims for completeness and Merge conflicts can happen during a `git merge`, `git rebase`, `git cherry-pick`, `git pull`, or `git revert`, and other operations. that admits the list is not complete, I have slight preference to the first one. >> By the way, is it just me who finds those "Here's", "there's" >> contractions disturbing in an official manual? I've seen many of >> them while reviewing this to be annoyed enough and had to blurt it >> out X-<. > > I find "here is" and "there is" to be distracting and overly formal, > different people are different I guess :) But I wouldn't want you to be "different" here. This is not your diary or personal note. This being a part of the technical manual, I would prefer to see the same formalness applied everywhere.