From: Duy Nguyen <pclouds@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2019 13:24:16 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH] git-diff.txt: prefer not using <commit>..<commit>
Message-ID: <CACsJy8DU02_kOqAHhU5EgMHKmkNSGdvt+7XzSHoZDB+b9sDRqg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <bc7c3f9d769b2d5a108ff4cdc3c7277e112fdb56.1552820745.git.liu.denton@gmail.com>

On Sun, Mar 17, 2019 at 6:09 PM Denton Liu <liu.denton@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> The documentation used to consider
>
>         git diff <commit> <commit>
>
> and
>
>         git diff <commit>..<commit>
>
> to be equal counterparts. However, rev-list-ish commands also use the
> <commit>..<commit> notation, but in a logically conflicting manner which
> was confusing for some users (including me!).
>
> Deprecating the notation entirely is not really an option because it
> would be an arduous process without much end-value. In addition, there
> are some valid use-cases that we don't want to break.
>
> Document the preference of the first form so that future confusion can
> be minimised.
>
> Signed-off-by: Denton Liu <liu.denton@gmail.com>
> ---
>
> Thanks all on your feedback on the discussion thread[1]! I opted for
> just the documentation-only route so we don't break any valid use-cases.
>
> [1]: https://public-inbox.org/git/20190311093751.GA31092@archbookpro.localdomain/
>
>  Documentation/git-diff.txt | 6 +++++-
>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/git-diff.txt b/Documentation/git-diff.txt
> index 72179d993c..10c7a2220c 100644
> --- a/Documentation/git-diff.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/git-diff.txt
> @@ -63,7 +63,11 @@ two blob objects, or changes between two files on disk.
>
>  'git diff' [<options>] <commit>..<commit> [--] [<path>...]::
>
> -       This is synonymous to the previous form.  If <commit> on
> +       This is synonymous to the previous form.  However,
> +       users should prefer the previous form over this form
> +       as this form may be more confusing due to the same
> +       notation having a logically conflicting meaning in
> +       linkgit:git-rev-list[1]-ish commands.  If <commit> on
>         one side is omitted, it will have the same effect as
>         using HEAD instead.

This is fine as-is. But another option to reduce even more exposure of
these forms (both <commit>..[<commit>] and <commit>...[<commit>]) is
to delete these forms in "DESCRIPTION" section and add maybe "EXOTIC
SYNTAX" (or something) section after "OPTIONS" for just them.

> --
> 2.21.0.512.g57bf1b23e1
>


-- 
Duy