threads / patch / 51377

patchdoc: fix form -> from typo

Subject: [PATCH] doc: fix form -> from typo

## tl;dr

6 messages between Jun 25, 2019 and Jun 26, 2019. Diffs are folded; open one to read it.

replies: 5people: 5as markdown or json

Catalin Criste· Jun 25, 2019, 06:36 UTC · lore

Signed-off-by: Catalin Criste <cris_linu_w@yahoo.com>
---
 Documentation/git-stash.txt | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

Show changes to Documentation/git-stash.txt +1 −2

diff --git a/Documentation/git-stash.txt b/Documentation/git-stash.txt
index 7ef8c4791177b..b96ce2d02d149 100644
--- a/Documentation/git-stash.txt
+++ b/Documentation/git-stash.txt
@@ -88,7 +88,7 @@ save [-p|--patch] [-k|--[no-]keep-index] [-u|--include-untracked] [-a|--all] [-q
 
 	This option is deprecated in favour of 'git stash push'.  It
 	differs from "stash push" in that it cannot take pathspecs,
-	and any non-option arguments form the message.
+	and any non-option arguments from the message.
 
 list [<options>]::
 

--
https://github.com/git/git/pull/521

Martin Ågren· Jun 25, 2019, 09:41 UTC · re: Catalin Criste · lore

Re: [PATCH] doc: fix form -> from typo

Hi Catalin

Welcome to the list!

On Tue, 25 Jun 2019 at 09:43, Catalin Criste <cris_linu_w@yahoo.com> wrote:

Show 6 quoted lines

> @@ -88,7 +88,7 @@ save [-p|--patch] [-k|--[no-]keep-index] [-u|--include-untracked] [-a|--all] [-q
>
>         This option is deprecated in favour of 'git stash push'.  It
>         differs from "stash push" in that it cannot take pathspecs,
> -       and any non-option arguments form the message.
> +       and any non-option arguments from the message.

I think this is actually intended as "form". It took me a couple of readings, but what this paragraph wants to say is that any non-option arguments will be used to form (construct) the message.

Do you have any suggestions as to how this could be made clearer? There are at least two of us that have stumbled on this. :-)

Cheers Martin

Johannes Schindelin· Jun 25, 2019, 11:40 UTC · re: Martin Ågren · lore

Re: [PATCH] doc: fix form -> from typo

Hi Martin,

On Tue, 25 Jun 2019, Martin Ågren wrote:

Show 12 quoted lines

> On Tue, 25 Jun 2019 at 09:43, Catalin Criste <cris_linu_w@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > @@ -88,7 +88,7 @@ save [-p|--patch] [-k|--[no-]keep-index] [-u|--include-untracked] [-a|--all] [-q
> >
> >         This option is deprecated in favour of 'git stash push'.  It
> >         differs from "stash push" in that it cannot take pathspecs,
> > -       and any non-option arguments form the message.
> > +       and any non-option arguments from the message.
>
> I think this is actually intended as "form". It took me a couple of
> readings, but what this paragraph wants to say is that any non-option
> arguments will be used to form (construct) the message.

You're right! I totally misread this, too.

> Do you have any suggestions as to how this could be made clearer?
> There are at least two of us that have stumbled on this. :-)

Make that three.

Maybe something like

	This option is deprecated in favour of 'git stash push'.  It
	differs from "stash push" in that it cannot take pathspecs;
	Instead, all non-option arguments are concatenated to form the stash
	message.

Ciao, Dscho

Martin Ågren· Jun 25, 2019, 17:49 UTC · re: Johannes Schindelin · lore

Re: [PATCH] doc: fix form -> from typo

On Tue, 25 Jun 2019 at 13:40, Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> wrote:

> On Tue, 25 Jun 2019, Martin Ågren wrote:

Show 13 quoted lines

> > Do you have any suggestions as to how this could be made clearer?
> > There are at least two of us that have stumbled on this. :-)
>
> Make that three.
>
> Maybe something like
>
>         This option is deprecated in favour of 'git stash push'.  It
>         differs from "stash push" in that it cannot take pathspecs;
>         Instead, all non-option arguments are concatenated to form the stash
>         message.
>
> ?

Looks good. I would probably avoid the semicolon ";" and in this case just replace it with a period. But it's nothing I feel strongly about.

Martin

Junio C Hamano· Jun 25, 2019, 20:07 UTC · re: Martin Ågren · lore

Re: [PATCH] doc: fix form -> from typo

Martin Ågren <martin.agren@gmail.com> writes:

Show 19 quoted lines

> Hi Catalin
>
> Welcome to the list!
>
> On Tue, 25 Jun 2019 at 09:43, Catalin Criste <cris_linu_w@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> @@ -88,7 +88,7 @@ save [-p|--patch] [-k|--[no-]keep-index] [-u|--include-untracked] [-a|--all] [-q
>>
>>         This option is deprecated in favour of 'git stash push'.  It
>>         differs from "stash push" in that it cannot take pathspecs,
>> -       and any non-option arguments form the message.
>> +       and any non-option arguments from the message.
>
> I think this is actually intended as "form". It took me a couple of
> readings, but what this paragraph wants to say is that any non-option
> arguments will be used to form (construct) the message.
>
> Do you have any suggestions as to how this could be made clearer?
> There are at least two of us that have stumbled on this. :-)

"become"?

Thomas Gummerer· Jun 26, 2019, 08:22 UTC · re: Martin Ågren · lore

Re: [PATCH] doc: fix form -> from typo

On 06/25, Martin Ågren wrote:

Show 19 quoted lines

> Hi Catalin
> 
> Welcome to the list!
> 
> On Tue, 25 Jun 2019 at 09:43, Catalin Criste <cris_linu_w@yahoo.com> wrote:
> 
> > @@ -88,7 +88,7 @@ save [-p|--patch] [-k|--[no-]keep-index] [-u|--include-untracked] [-a|--all] [-q
> >
> >         This option is deprecated in favour of 'git stash push'.  It
> >         differs from "stash push" in that it cannot take pathspecs,
> > -       and any non-option arguments form the message.
> > +       and any non-option arguments from the message.
> 
> I think this is actually intended as "form". It took me a couple of
> readings, but what this paragraph wants to say is that any non-option
> arguments will be used to form (construct) the message.
> 
> Do you have any suggestions as to how this could be made clearer?
> There are at least two of us that have stumbled on this. :-)

Even though I originally wrote this I had to have a double take on it. Maybe what you're saying above would be good? "and any non-option arguments are used to form the message" sounds a little clearer to me. Or maybe even use the word construct? Dunno.