From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 91A9820989 for ; Mon, 10 Oct 2016 18:27:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752421AbcJJS0s (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Oct 2016 14:26:48 -0400 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([104.130.231.41]:55213 "EHLO cloud.peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752216AbcJJS0r (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Oct 2016 14:26:47 -0400 Received: (qmail 7567 invoked by uid 109); 10 Oct 2016 18:26:25 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.2) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with SMTP; Mon, 10 Oct 2016 18:26:25 +0000 Received: (qmail 484 invoked by uid 111); 10 Oct 2016 18:26:44 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with SMTP; Mon, 10 Oct 2016 14:26:44 -0400 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Mon, 10 Oct 2016 14:26:23 -0400 Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2016 14:26:23 -0400 From: Jeff King To: Junio C Hamano Cc: Heiko Voigt , git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] clean up confusing suggestion for commit references Message-ID: <20161010182623.hsczlsfc6oaa2byj@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <20161007095638.GA55445@book.hvoigt.net> <20161007143200.qw77pdsymbdmjhbw@sigill.intra.peff.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 11:24:01AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Jeff King writes: > > > On Fri, Oct 07, 2016 at 11:56:38AM +0200, Heiko Voigt wrote: > > > >> The description for referencing commits looks as if it is contradicting > >> the example, since it is itself enclosed in double quotes. Lets use > >> single quotes around the description and include the double quotes in > >> the description so it matches the example. > >> --- > >> Sorry for opening this up again but I just looked up the format and was > >> like: "Umm, which one is now the correct one..." > >> > >> For this makes more sense. What do others think? > > > > Looking over the threads, I wasn't sure there was consensus[1,2]. So it would > > be equally correct to drop the quotes from the example. > > > > I dunno. I am in favor of no-quotes, myself, so maybe I am just > > manufacturing dissent in my mind. :) > > I no longer have preference either way myself, even though I was in > favor of no-quotes simply because I had an alias to produce that > format and was used to it. I'll admit that I don't care _that_ much and am happy to leave it up to individual authors, as long as nobody quotes SubmittingPatches at me as some kind of gospel when I use the no-quotes form. -Peff