From: Ben Knoble <ben.knoble@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2025 14:06:21 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] doc: git-reset: clarify `git reset <pathspec>`
Message-ID: <9EB375A8-CDD0-4717-B1DF-32DC3078A50A@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <xmqqa51pxg9p.fsf@gitster.g>


> Le 17 oct. 2025 à 19:25, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> a écrit :
> 
> "Julia Evans via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@gmail.com> writes:
> 
>> `git reset (--patch | -p) [<tree-ish>] [--] [<pathspec>...]`::
>> -    Interactively select hunks in the difference between the index
>> -    and _<tree-ish>_ (defaults to `HEAD`).  The chosen hunks are applied
>> -    in reverse to the index.
>> +    Interactively select changes from the difference between the index
>> +    and the specified commit or tree (which defaults to `HEAD`).
>> +    The chosen changes are unstaged.
>> +
>> This means that `git reset -p` is the opposite of `git add -p`, i.e.
>> -you can use it to selectively reset hunks. See the "Interactive Mode"
>> -section of linkgit:git-add[1] to learn how to operate the `--patch` mode.
>> +you can use it to selectively unstage changes. See the "Interactive Mode"
>> +section of linkgit:git-add[1] to learn how to use the `--patch` option.
> 
> I do not see a good reason why we avoid saying the noun "patch",
> especially when we see it in the option.  If we were allowed to say
> "patch" here, "changes from the difference between ..." can be
> rephrased to "parts of the patch that makes the index match the
> specified commit", which may be simpler.

I think the issue was the word « hunk », not « patch ».