From: Julia Evans Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2026 10:42:40 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] [doc] Remove gittutorial-2 Message-ID: <8a5b742a-3f11-4bfa-954b-ffdd839b6d43@app.fastmail.com> In-Reply-To: > Is this the "two series" approach you mentioned earlier? The idea is that: 1. we delete gittutorial-2 (this series) 2. we delete gittutorial 3. we add a new gittutorial We could also combine #2 and #3 into a single series. I don't feel strongly about that and it might (as you mention below) be better to wait to delete gittutorial until we have a replacement ready to go. > There is no need to ensure that the new document that replaces the > old one covers everything the old one did. After all, giving us a > clean slate and letting us choose what to cover (and, more > importantly, what not to cover) with fresh eyes to match the needs > of today's world is the whole point of redoing the tutorial > document. > > So I personally feel it is OK to remove the old one, without > promising or even hinting at what in the new one that replaces it. > But we would want to see its replacement in the not-so-distant > future. I'm not planning to replace gittutorial-2 since the material in it is already covered by gitdatamodel and gitcore-tutorial. Let me know if you disagree! > Also, we may want to decide what to do with gittutorial. It is > short and reasonably sweet. One old-fashioned thing that does not > exactly match today's prevalent usage patterns may be that it starts > tracking a new project from a tarball, but other than that, it may > not hurt to keep it around. I do not know. We definitely want a tutorial that covers `git init`, `git add`, `git commit`, etc. Any replacement would definitely cover those topics, but I don't see the value of having 2 such tutorials. Why do you think it would be valuable to keep it around? It seems like it would cause a lot of confusion to me.