From: Junio C Hamano Date: Wed, 02 Dec 2020 22:55:56 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH] glossary: improve "branch" definition Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <877dq05swb.fsf@osv.gnss.ru> Sergey Organov writes: > So, what do we finally do? Just remove "active", or replace it with > "separate"? > ... > It's fine with me either way. Will you just fix it yourself, or should I > re-roll if "separate" is not accepted? Let's see ... gitster goes and looks for what he suggested ... So, I dunno. I'd say just settling on the simplest "is a line of development" would be the easiest path for now. I've queued the following. Thanks for pinging a stalled thread. --- >8 ------ >8 ------ >8 ------ >8 ------ >8 ------ >8 ------ >8 --- From: Sergey Organov Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2020 23:05:51 +0300 Subject: [PATCH] glossary: improve "branch" definition The old phrasing is at least questionable, if not wrong, as there are a lot of branches out there that didn't see active development for years, yet they are still branches, ready to become active again any time. Signed-off-by: Sergey Organov Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano --- Notes (amlog): Message-Id: <87blfnhm8w.fsf@osv.gnss.ru> Documentation/glossary-content.txt | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/Documentation/glossary-content.txt b/Documentation/glossary-content.txt index 090c888335..67c7a50b96 100644 --- a/Documentation/glossary-content.txt +++ b/Documentation/glossary-content.txt @@ -18,7 +18,7 @@ Untyped <>, e.g. the contents of a file. [[def_branch]]branch:: - A "branch" is an active line of development. The most recent + A "branch" is a line of development. The most recent <> on a branch is referred to as the tip of that branch. The tip of the branch is referenced by a branch <>, which moves forward as additional development -- 2.29.2-577-g9ac7fd3f3f