From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
To: Nicolas Sebrecht <nicolas.s.dev@gmx.fr>
Cc: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>,
Sebastian Pipping <webmaster@hartwork.org>,
Thomas Rast <trast@student.ethz.ch>, Git ML <git@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Parameter --color-words not documented for "git show"
Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 18:34:29 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110120233429.GB9442@sigill.intra.peff.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110120231649.GC14184@vidovic>
On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 12:16:49AM +0100, Nicolas Sebrecht wrote:
> The 20/01/11, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> > Sebastian Pipping <webmaster@hartwork.org> writes:
> >
> > > On 01/20/11 21:27, Thomas Rast wrote:
> > >> Quote from the latter:
> > >>
> > >> This manual page describes only the most frequently used options.
> > >
> > > Okay. Is that a good a idea?
> >
> > Yes; the alternative is to list everything.
>
> Would it be bad? I tend to think that a manual page is the good place to
> list everything the program accepts as parameters and how to use them.
> FMHO, Manual page is not where newcomers look to learn but it should
> help everybody to find and understand all of the available options.
The problem is that we have a bazillion diff options that appear in many
manpages, so you are stuck with one of:
1. repeat them all in each manpage (usually via some automagic
include), which dwarfs the original content, and makes it hard for
users to see subtle differences between commands
2. Say "this describes only the most frequently used options", which
leaves the user wondering which infrequently used options exist.
3. Say "we also take diff options, and you can find out more about
diff options in git-diff(1)." This at least points the user in the
right direction, but you can't search for "--color-words" in the
page.
4. Do (3), but also list the all (or common) diff options in a succint
list without descriptions, and refer the user to git-diff(1). Then
they can grep if they like, and while they won't get the immediate
answer, they will get referred to the right place.
As you can probably guess, I favor option (4), though we already do (3)
in some places.
-Peff
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-01-20 23:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-01-20 19:58 Parameter --color-words not documented for "git show" Sebastian Pipping
2011-01-20 20:27 ` Thomas Rast
2011-01-20 20:43 ` Sebastian Pipping
2011-01-20 21:25 ` Junio C Hamano
2011-01-20 23:16 ` Nicolas Sebrecht
2011-01-20 23:34 ` Jeff King [this message]
2011-01-21 0:05 ` Sebastian Pipping
2011-01-21 0:20 ` Jeff King
2011-01-21 0:27 ` Sebastian Pipping
2011-01-21 6:08 ` Junio C Hamano
2011-01-21 16:16 ` Jeff King
2011-01-21 10:08 ` Maaartin
2011-01-21 16:17 ` Jeff King
2011-01-23 10:35 ` Jakub Narebski
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20110120233429.GB9442@sigill.intra.peff.net \
--to=peff@peff.net \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=nicolas.s.dev@gmx.fr \
--cc=trast@student.ethz.ch \
--cc=webmaster@hartwork.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://80x24.org/mirrors/git.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).