From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andrew Ardill Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] Documentation/git-checkout.txt: clarify usage Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2012 12:29:28 +1100 Message-ID: References: <1355726702-27974-1-git-send-email-chris@rorvick.com> <1355726702-27974-2-git-send-email-chris@rorvick.com> <7vhanlnnz7.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <17103971665F4C4495C6C96086A58B8F@PhilipOakley> <7v1ueol6ut.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <7vobhsjq6a.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: Philip Oakley , Chris Rorvick , Git List , Tomas Carnecky , Woody Wu To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Dec 18 02:35:25 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Tkm5c-0008CH-Et for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Tue, 18 Dec 2012 02:35:24 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754040Ab2LRBfE (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Dec 2012 20:35:04 -0500 Received: from mail-qc0-f170.google.com ([209.85.216.170]:45947 "EHLO mail-qc0-f170.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753794Ab2LRBfD (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Dec 2012 20:35:03 -0500 X-Greylist: delayed 313 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Mon, 17 Dec 2012 20:35:03 EST Received: by mail-qc0-f170.google.com with SMTP id d42so30768qca.15 for ; Mon, 17 Dec 2012 17:35:02 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=22aQCEFxykCO8chLe3VjV8W+c08NU1Q8CtSNHbaypPM=; b=QtF+z55lsrgQJ6mNWBOOGLOYcgx4UMkLp8cxMSUWN6yTZGi6lfUP+uOE+gV2dqQXat R4xQJk1tggAX0cxvskqn1f3wYxm6oGOVNSo3DN9JpElA52EblCRfa630IaPVIM/pqATY /xTHXyRxxBtEU+7wunwT2QzT9Qs+/qGjV0cwOLXFb8/O0SMqX1BKPOJrDSl8ytRUEHs0 tOTVefQ1r05kPh7qr6nCm3ZYtx5sLehK+60hySlviaTx1cpX6pVqT8TPkHQEhmbNjNY+ CyD9McBCsZyAe9df22BBqERBL5BIJIRQm8UInzpFX4uYzSGuBsSkyoWSS2u0/10FBCVd uguw== Received: by 10.49.118.138 with SMTP id km10mr150877qeb.18.1355794189123; Mon, 17 Dec 2012 17:29:49 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.49.14.3 with HTTP; Mon, 17 Dec 2012 17:29:28 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <7vobhsjq6a.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On 18 December 2012 08:59, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Andrew Ardill writes: >> Even if the primary purpose of "git checkout " is to "check >> out the branch so that further work is done on that branch", I don't >> believe that means it has to be stated first. In fact, I would say >> that there are enough other use cases that the language should be >> slightly more use-case agnostic in the first situation. For example, >> someone might switch to another branch or commit simply to see what >> state the tree was in at that point. > > I've been deliberately avoiding the term "switch", actually. I > agree that it may be familiar to people with prior exposure to > subversion, but that is not the primary audience of the manual. I don't have much experience with svn, so I didn't make that connection. Independent of svn usage, what is wrong with the term 'switch'? I would be interested to hear how translators communicate the checkout concept, as I assume the word checkout doesn't exist in many languages. For me, switching between revisions is a natural way of phrasing the action, but perhaps there is a better way of saying the same thing? >> Some people use checkout to >> deploy a tag of the working tree onto a production server. The first >> example in particular is, I think, a common enough operation that >> restricting the opening lines of documentation to talking about >> building further work is misleading. > > I agree with you that sightseeing use case where you do not intend > to make any commit is also important. That is exactly why I said > "further work is done on that branch" not "to that branch" in the > message you are responding to. Ah ok, I didn't pick up on that nuance. Your suggestion from earlier has, for example, "Prepare to work on building new history on " which *is* excluding that use case. Perhaps modifying similar lines to something like "Prepare to work with the repository/history/something from " or maybe just "Prepare to work with " would better encapsulate those use cases. Following lines would expand on what it means to work with a branch or commit, and the technical details of updates to the repositories current state. Regards, Andrew Ardill