From: Kristoffer Haugsbakk <kristofferhaugsbakk@fastmail.com>
Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2026 22:23:07 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH] doc: rerere-options.adoc: link to git-rerere(1)
Message-ID: <d262682d-78d0-4990-b89f-5b8fa836e7f9@app.fastmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CALnO6CAET9GOsNCdmd3_Jp5Qr3Rfxn8cgmu9n0N8s7uNYpCchg@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Feb 9, 2026, at 22:57, D. Ben Knoble wrote:
>>[snip]
>> diff --git a/Documentation/rerere-options.adoc b/Documentation/rerere-options.adoc
>> index b0b920144a6..115882edab1 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/rerere-options.adoc
>> +++ b/Documentation/rerere-options.adoc
>> @@ -4,6 +4,6 @@
>>         the current conflict to update the files in the working
>>         tree, allow it to also update the index with the result of
>>         resolution.  `--no-rerere-autoupdate` is a good way to
>> -       double-check what `rerere` did and catch potential
>> +       double-check what linkgit:git-rerere[1] did and catch potential
>>         mismerges, before committing the result to the index with a
>>         separate `git add`.
>
> Minor: should this adjacent be linkgit too? I thought yes, but on
> second read we really are talking about the command.
>
> Anyway, agreed that rerere should get linked. Thanks!

The `git add`? Good question. I considered it. At first it seemed like
too much of a “apply this command”, if that even makes sense. But now I
think rendering it as

    separate git-add(1).

Makes sense.

Thanks for taking a look. :)