From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2025 01:44:28 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] doc: git-push: clarify intro
Message-ID: <xmqq7bxzcgsj.fsf@gitster.g>
In-Reply-To: <70034c35-8f08-4ee0-9017-7faf6f55ae14@app.fastmail.com>

"Julia Evans" <julia@jvns.ca> writes:

> Re "refs": I think "refs" is pretty relevant to `git push`, which is why I left it in
> (as "or other references", to give readers a hint that a branch is a type
> of ref/reference).

I have (and I didn't have) no issues with "refs" -> "references".

> Will try this:
>
>     Updates one or more branches, tags, or other references in a remote
>     repository from your local repository, and sends all necessary data in
>     those branches or tags that isn't already on the remote.
>
> The goal there is to make sure the reader knows that git push may need to
> send a significant amount of data, depending on what's in the new commits
> you're pushing.

Yes.  I do not partculary see the point of deliberately trying to be
vague by saying "data" (in "all necessary data") instead of "tags,
commits, trees, and blobs (collectively known as objects), but I
agree with the stated goal here.