threads / patch / 32584

patchminor diff between gitweb docs and actual template for $GIT/description

Subject: [PATCH] minor diff between gitweb docs and actual template for $GIT/description

## tl;dr

3 messages between Jan 11, 2013 and Jan 11, 2013. Diffs are folded; open one to read it.

replies: 2people: 2as markdown or json

Tim Chase· Jan 11, 2013, 00:33 UTC · lore

The documentation for gitweb gives one description of the default content for the $GIT/description, the description template has other text. One of these two patches should be applied to bring them into order (applying both would just reverse the problem). Or, both could be changed to the same new text.

-tkc (not subscribed to the actual git ML, just git-users@googlegroups.com)

Show changes to 2 files +2 −2

Documentation/gitweb.txt, templates/this--description

diff --git a/Documentation/gitweb.txt b/Documentation/gitweb.txt
index 168e8bf..7c4cb69 100644
--- a/Documentation/gitweb.txt
+++ b/Documentation/gitweb.txt
@@ -227,7 +227,7 @@ description (or `gitweb.description`)::
 	repository).  Plain text file; HTML will be escaped.  By default set to
 +
 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-Unnamed repository; edit this file to name it for gitweb.
+Unnamed repository; edit this file 'description' to name the repository.
 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 +
 from the template during repository creation, usually installed in


diff --git a/templates/this--description b/templates/this--description
index 498b267..c6f25e8 100644
--- a/templates/this--description
+++ b/templates/this--description
@@ -1 +1 @@
-Unnamed repository; edit this file 'description' to name the repository.
+Unnamed repository; edit this file to name it for gitweb.

Jonathan Nieder· Jan 11, 2013, 02:22 UTC · re: Tim Chase · lore

Re: [PATCH] minor diff between gitweb docs and actual template for $GIT/description

(+cc: Jakub, who maintains gitweb) Hi Tim,

Tim Chase wrote:

Show 5 quoted lines

> The documentation for gitweb gives one description of the default
> content for the $GIT/description, the description template has other
> text.  One of these two patches should be applied to bring them into
> order (applying both would just reverse the problem).  Or, both
> could be changed to the same new text.

May we have your sign-off? (See Documentation/SubmittingPatches for what this means.)

Show 11 quoted lines

> --- a/Documentation/gitweb.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/gitweb.txt
> @@ -227,7 +227,7 @@ description (or `gitweb.description`)::
>  	repository).  Plain text file; HTML will be escaped.  By default set to
>  +
>  -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> -Unnamed repository; edit this file to name it for gitweb.
> +Unnamed repository; edit this file 'description' to name the repository.
>  -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>  +
>  from the template during repository creation, usually installed in

Looks sane to me.  Thanks for noticing.

Regards, Jonathan

Tim Chase· Jan 11, 2013, 04:25 UTC · re: Jonathan Nieder · lore

Re: [PATCH] minor diff between gitweb docs and actual template for $GIT/description

On 01/10/13 20:22, Jonathan Nieder wrote:

Show 13 quoted lines

> (+cc: Jakub, who maintains gitweb)
> Hi Tim,
>
> Tim Chase wrote:
>
>> The documentation for gitweb gives one description of the default
>> content for the $GIT/description, the description template has other
>> text.  One of these two patches should be applied to bring them into
>> order (applying both would just reverse the problem).  Or, both
>> could be changed to the same new text.
>
> May we have your sign-off?  (See Documentation/SubmittingPatches for
> what this means.)

Hahahahah...a one liner doc-fix copy/pasting code from one place in the codebase to another? If you need it, you've got it:

   For my one line diff:
   Signed-off-by: Tim Chase <git@tim.thechases.com>

Otherwise, consider my contribution CC0 or public domain or whatever suits you best. Or take my patch as a bug report and "make" the fix yourself. :-)

The patches should have been based off the master branch of github.com/git/git, FWIW.

-tkc @gumnos