From: Patrick Steinhardt Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2026 07:09:27 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] last-modified: rewrite error message when more than one revision given Message-ID: In-Reply-To: On Thu, Jan 15, 2026 at 03:34:50PM +0100, Kristoffer Haugsbakk wrote: > On Thu, Jan 15, 2026, at 12:54, Patrick Steinhardt wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 15, 2026 at 12:33:36PM +0100, Toon Claes wrote: > >>[snip] > >> I was thinking about mentioning something like "commit-ish" instead, but > >> I felt "commit-ish" isn't a commonly used term toward end-users. Looking > >> at gitglossary(7), it says "revision" is a "synonym for commit". I'm > >> happy to change this message, but I'm not sure s/revision/commit-ish/ is > >> the best change for this. > > > > gitglossary(7) also defines commit-ish, but I guess you're right that > > revision is the more common term. I'm a bit surprised that it's defined > > to be a synonym for a commit, but oh, well. > > Surprised that “revision” is a synonym for commit? Why is that? Because in my mind a revision can resolve to any object type. "^{}" for example is a revision, but it can resolve for example to a tree if you say "HEAD^{tree}". Still a revision, but definitely does not resolve to a commit. Also, it's confusing to conflate the way to name a commit with a commit itself. "HEAD~10" is a revision, but taken by itself it's not a commit. It's not even clear whether it resolves, so it feels sensible to me to keep these two concepts separate from one another. Patrick