Re: [PATCH 1/3] doc: reword -B option of diff into something sensible

[Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>]

Jean-Noël Avila <jn.avila@free.fr> writes:

> The sentence seemed to miss a verb.

Yeah, that is entirely my fault.  What is worse is that the
description is full of overly long sentences.  The result of
applying this patch may be more gramatically correct than the
original, and it might be easier to read than the original, but I
think it is still too hard to understand than it should be.

Perhaps we should consider a total rewrite of the paragraph (no pun
intended).



> Signed-off-by: Jean-Noël Avila <jn.avila@free.fr>
> ---
>  Documentation/diff-options.txt | 16 ++++++++--------
>  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/diff-options.txt b/Documentation/diff-options.txt
> index 09faee3b44..350d0a2fb0 100644
> --- a/Documentation/diff-options.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/diff-options.txt
> @@ -452,14 +452,14 @@ endif::git-format-patch[]
>  	create. This serves two purposes:
>  +
>  It affects the way a change that amounts to a total rewrite of a file
> -not as a series of deletion and insertion mixed together with a very
> -few lines that happen to match textually as the context, but as a
> -single deletion of everything old followed by a single insertion of
> -everything new, and the number `m` controls this aspect of the -B
> -option (defaults to 60%). `-B/70%` specifies that less than 30% of the
> -original should remain in the result for Git to consider it a total
> -rewrite (i.e. otherwise the resulting patch will be a series of
> -deletion and insertion mixed together with context lines).
> +does not appear as a series of deletion and insertion mixed together
> +with a very few lines that happen to match textually as the context,
> +but as a single deletion of everything old followed by a single
> +insertion of everything new, and the number `m` controls this aspect
> +of the -B option (defaults to 60%). `-B/70%` specifies that less than
> +30% of the original should remain in the result for Git to consider it
> +a total rewrite (i.e. otherwise the resulting patch will be a series
> +of deletion and insertion mixed together with context lines).
>  +
>  When used with -M, a totally-rewritten file is also considered as the
>  source of a rename (usually -M only considers a file that disappeared