threads / patch / 13340

patchDocumentation: hooks: fix missing verb in pre-applypatch description

Subject: [PATCH] Documentation: hooks: fix missing verb in pre-applypatch description

## tl;dr

2 messages between May 1, 2008 and May 1, 2008. Diffs are folded; open one to read it.

replies: 1people: 2as markdown or json

Christian Couder· May 1, 2008, 08:17 UTC · lore
Signed-off-by: Christian Couder <chriscool@tuxfamily.org>
---
 Documentation/githooks.txt |    9 +++++----
 1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
	Manoj Srivastava a écrit :
	>         I am afraid I can't parse the final sentence: I assume it means
	>  that the patched working tree is not committed, but the missing verb
	>  makes it harder for non-native speakers of the english language to
	>  understand what is meant here.
	Perhaps something like this patch would fix it.
Show changes to Documentation/githooks.txt +5 −4
diff --git a/Documentation/githooks.txt b/Documentation/githooks.txt
index 62ee065..0ede1ac 100644
--- a/Documentation/githooks.txt
+++ b/Documentation/githooks.txt
@@ -40,10 +40,11 @@ The default 'applypatch-msg' hook, when enabled, runs the
 pre-applypatch
 --------------
 
-This hook is invoked by `git-am`.  It takes no parameter,
-and is invoked after the patch is applied, but before a commit
-is made.  Exiting with non-zero status causes the working tree
-after application of the patch not committed.
+This hook is invoked by `git-am`.  It takes no parameter, and is
+invoked after the patch is applied, but before a commit is made.
+
+If it exits with non-zero status, then the working tree will not be
+committed after application of the patch.
 
 It can be used to inspect the current working tree and refuse to
 make a commit if it does not pass certain test.
-- 
1.5.5.1.100.gc23d
Thomas Adam· May 1, 2008, 09:56 UTC · re: Christian Couder · lore

Re: [PATCH] Documentation: hooks: fix missing verb in pre-applypatch description

On 01/05/2008, Christian Couder <chriscool@tuxfamily.org> wrote:
>  +If it exits with non-zero status, then the working tree will not be
>  +committed after application of the patch.
That's even worse.
"committed after application of the patch".  Too formal, and a little odd.  Try:
"committed after applying the patch."
-- Thomas Adam

← back to recent threads