Re: What's cooking in git.git (Mar 2014, #03; Fri, 14)
- From
Philip Oakley <philipoakley@iee.org>
- Date
- Mar 17, 2014, 22:39 UTC
- Message-ID
- <A3D6A8DA9247437B9B4751C5C5B6924C@PhilipOakley>
- In-Reply-To
- <CALkWK0npxgi2gWQbuYZLn_N0GxgTdPTR8c-yhgCxEV=mM2Zngw@mail.gmail.com>
From: "Ramkumar Ramachandra" <artagnon@gmail.com>
Show 17 quoted lines
> Philip Oakley wrote: >>> * po/everyday-doc (2014-01-27) 1 commit >>> - Make 'git help everyday' work >>> >>> This may make the said command to emit something, but the source is >>> not meant to be formatted into a manual pages to begin with, and >>> also its contents are a bit stale. It may be a good first step in >>> the right direction, but needs more work to at least get the >>> mark-up right before public consumption. >> >> I'm not sure what elements you feel need adjustment. At the moment >> the >> markup formats quite reasonably to my eyes, both as an HTML page and >> as a >> man page. > > I sent you a small patch fixing some minor markup issues.
Thanks, I'll look through them. There was one part where there was a sub-list which made the numbering look wrong, but it formatted fine.
Show 15 quoted lines
>
>> That said, the (lack of) introduction could do with a paragraph to
>> introduce
>> the "guide". I have something in draft..
>>
>> I had a thought that it may be worth a slight rearrangement to add a
>> section
>> covering the setting up of one's remotes, depending whether it was
>> forked,
>> corporate, or independent, but the lack of resolution on the next
>> {publish/push} topic makes such a re-write awkward at this stage.
>> (Ram cc'd)
>
> Before attempting to introduce remote.pushdefault and triangular
> workflows, I'd first fix the main issue: stale content.My priority order was to fix accessibility, then basic format, followed by a nicer intro, and then the "current" content, rather than get hung up on initially word-smithing new content, which could go down a rabbit hole which would leaving the stale content in place. Hopefully the patch will bring out some more clarifications that folks feel are outdated or no longer informative.
> I'm not sure > who uses git show-branch or mailx anymore, for instance.
I hadn't even realised mailx was refering to specific program rather than a generic "mail-MUA-X" ;-)
regards
Philip