Re: [PATCH v1 1/3] doc: commit: --fixup/--squash can take a commit revision
- From
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
- Date
- Aug 14, 2016, 22:09 UTC
- Message-ID
- <xmqq60r3knoz.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <20160814214630.1312-2-philipoakley@iee.org>
Philip Oakley <philipoakley@iee.org> writes:
Show 14 quoted lines
> Be clearer that the --fixup/--squash options can take any of the > gitrevisions methods of specifying a commit, not just a 'hash'. > > Signed-off-by: Philip Oakley <philipoakley@iee.org> > --- > ... > @@ -81,15 +81,15 @@ OPTIONS > --fixup=<commit>:: > Construct a commit message for use with `rebase --autosquash`. > The commit message will be the subject line from the specified > - commit with a prefix of "fixup! ". See linkgit:git-rebase[1] > - for details. > + commit revision with a prefix of "fixup! ". See linkgit:git-rebase[1] > + and linkgit:gitrevisions[7] for details.
The same comment applies to the other hunk, but rephrasing "commit" with "commit revision" (the latter is not even in the glossary) does not make it clearer at all. Especially when discussing rebases and anything that rewrites commits, it can easily be mistaken as if you are talking about v2 of the commit by fixing up the original, but that is not the impression you want to give.
"The specified commit" is clear enough. It may be debatable if we want to talk about "how" to specify the commit, though. I think the use of "commit" in an angle-bracket-pair in the label for the section, i.e. "--fixup=<commit>", has been considered to be clear enough to tell that you can use usual extended SHA-1 syntax to specify the commit you want to talk about, but if so, that is not limited to this entry, and I do not think this description or the other one for the "--squash" option are particularly worse than those for the "-c" and "-C" options. The description for "-c" does say "Take an existing commit object", but that's like "the specified commit" used here.