From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.9 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id B734B1F4C0 for ; Fri, 11 Oct 2019 16:11:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728252AbfJKQLO (ORCPT ); Fri, 11 Oct 2019 12:11:14 -0400 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([104.130.231.41]:45850 "HELO cloud.peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1726666AbfJKQLN (ORCPT ); Fri, 11 Oct 2019 12:11:13 -0400 Received: (qmail 15579 invoked by uid 109); 11 Oct 2019 16:11:13 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.2) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with SMTP; Fri, 11 Oct 2019 16:11:13 +0000 Authentication-Results: cloud.peff.net; auth=none Received: (qmail 2503 invoked by uid 111); 11 Oct 2019 16:14:08 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with (TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Fri, 11 Oct 2019 12:14:08 -0400 Authentication-Results: peff.net; auth=none Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2019 12:11:12 -0400 From: Jeff King To: Philip Oakley Cc: Denton Liu , Git Mailing List Subject: Re: [PATCH] git-rev-list.txt: prune options in synopsis Message-ID: <20191011161112.GA19741@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <645cc54c4c86493c855ec6b0b892a0bc8e999249.1570234118.git.liu.denton@gmail.com> <20191011060457.GC20094@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 Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 05:02:33PM +0100, Philip Oakley wrote: > Another case, of a different style, is that of `git bundle --all` which does > need mentioning that particular rev-list option as a major usage (I couldn't > manage to understand the three layers of man page that needed reading). > > I had proposed a patch many years ago [1] but the feedback wasn't positive, > though my SO question continues [2] to get votes. Yeah, I agree that "git bundle" could be more clear about this. I think just adding an example like this might help: # generate a bundle similar to what "git clone" would produce git bundle create file.bundle --branches --tags -Peff