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: AS3215 2.6.0.0/16 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.6 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from out1.vger.email (out1.vger.email [IPv6:2620:137:e000::1:20]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9217E1F727 for ; Tue, 28 Jun 2022 10:30:37 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: dcvr.yhbt.net; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="cs2Z/hK/"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1344318AbiF1K2M (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Jun 2022 06:28:12 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:60618 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1343564AbiF1K2K (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Jun 2022 06:28:10 -0400 Received: from mail-ej1-x62c.google.com (mail-ej1-x62c.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::62c]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F21B8BE0 for ; Tue, 28 Jun 2022 03:28:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ej1-x62c.google.com with SMTP id u15so24768702ejc.10 for ; Tue, 28 Jun 2022 03:28:06 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:references:user-agent:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version; bh=a/YMDr0+0IdNBu83de//EST38m73ajszSSoZ7XME5xk=; b=cs2Z/hK/3tAYKeBvG6o3DoDeRai43jlc2kt9sLChT+RevXY2n9vMbp50KJmIPlJXPv v42c/4Dx7EnRkOuVb2posqLetdUB0kskKa6fvhXancfV5jarfV3S/YP1fIOn8/3lE1A4 1qesVdd7qY6+E1AIBvbnsgdAfAB8+9K73ou+d3SDn7Km/Xx8/5bHlpys8s+SKb6ZkqI/ 9NDWqUsWLSIXQyUgxYodNCAB7ky9pVYr3ED+M4an62cVABn2kZICNwvkqkzuRdyw7jkB 9qS5Pv/UkHRc4QqsnrcpXJ+7WOJ05PQXq5QOeIEXZB+vKcHnZBG6LS7fDbmPFlHOysJS ipdg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:references:user-agent :in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version; bh=a/YMDr0+0IdNBu83de//EST38m73ajszSSoZ7XME5xk=; b=hsJ5UslBwTDIeClwQVitSYrsUx9Hzp5YjaaIDNHIwPm64hC2FuhRfkyEbX13sBZ78P +gDCxQvnj/glxzBVjL2bP/4PveKg0+jR5tycKKF+/a6Z12iV7/kD6CJMuTa8d9NDmagf twCJKzOrklJbIj5sZRNwP246GcHDn55KuZaUeqDMTHD6KztKda5+z7P6fBZ2vfr7SuNT uYfB+ND7bKsWUDZaGtv65yCQm21TPh/X+FwTS39bgIF84P34ZCPETO/d6mQqN+kfJpqk PzeJ7OpNLK+3MFsKHBegwK3UBvsMoHHcQ/BduzBeA4OL26NICZx8tkSs0uw+U5XaKKsY Gyzw== X-Gm-Message-State: AJIora+i3dfwn+zBFrHYUatkv8yoqObnGrnLNOR7PtIIlK5XdEp7Nzjb Je5n4xiiR93xZRKXrAth9qg= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGRyM1txzGISn+EQCVWn5rdYtUvZ2W7bxGe3KSIAh5kGnPagFgJV9H8ujGPGUazhsCWgLZY16bwA9Q== X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:4fc4:b0:6da:b4c6:fadb with SMTP id i4-20020a1709064fc400b006dab4c6fadbmr17479670ejw.282.1656412084914; Tue, 28 Jun 2022 03:28:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gmgdl (dhcp-077-248-183-071.chello.nl. [77.248.183.71]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id bo5-20020a170906d04500b006ff0fe78cb7sm6221003ejb.133.2022.06.28.03.28.03 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 28 Jun 2022 03:28:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from avar by gmgdl with local (Exim 4.95) (envelope-from ) id 1o68Rt-001p1u-NR; Tue, 28 Jun 2022 12:28:01 +0200 From: =?utf-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsA==?= Bjarmason To: Derrick Stolee via GitGitGadget Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, gitster@pobox.com, me@ttaylorr.com, Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de, Derrick Stolee Subject: Re: [PATCH] git-rebase.txt: use back-ticks consistently Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2022 12:22:18 +0200 References: User-agent: Debian GNU/Linux bookworm/sid; Emacs 27.1; mu4e 1.7.12 In-reply-to: Message-ID: <220628.86k091f5fy.gmgdl@evledraar.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Jun 27 2022, Derrick Stolee via GitGitGadget wrote: > From: Derrick Stolee This looks 99% good, but... > While inspecting the 'git rebase' documentation, I noticed that it is > inconsistent with how it uses back-ticks (or other punctuation) for > identifying Git commands, command-line arguments, or values for those > arguments. > > Sometimes, an argument (like '--interactive') would appear without any > punctuation, causing the argument to not have any special formatting. > Other times, arguments or 'git rebase' itself would have single-quotes > giving a bold look (in the HTML documentation at least). > > By consistently using back-ticks, these types of strings appear in a > monospace font with special highlighting to appear more clearly as text > that exists in a command-line invocation of a Git command. > > This rather-large diff is the result of scanning git-rebase.txt and > adding back-ticks as appropriate. Some are adding back-ticks where there > was no punctuation. Others are replacing single quotes. > > There are also a few minor cleanups in the process, such as one place > that did not use tabs for the first paragraph in a bulletted list. > Another case still referred to the dashed form, but it was the only use > in the file except for the heading and NAME section. I think the commit message should speak more matter-of-factly & briefly, i.e. just "change so and so...". > While I noticed this inconsistency when looking at git rebase as part of > the git rebase --update-refs work, I didn't know the best way to update > the document from start to finish. > > This giant update is probably not the best way to present the change. > > I can see splitting it up in a few ways, but I wanted to check to first > see if that was necessary. If it is, then here are the strategies I > considered: > > 1. Focus on type of update. This would mean a change for adding > back-ticks on all --