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=-3.9 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,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 B5B3B202DD for ; Mon, 23 Oct 2017 01:19:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932180AbdJWBTm (ORCPT ); Sun, 22 Oct 2017 21:19:42 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com ([64.147.108.70]:56813 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932171AbdJWBTl (ORCPT ); Sun, 22 Oct 2017 21:19:41 -0400 Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A04B9ABE10; Sun, 22 Oct 2017 21:19:40 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=iakUPK3rk7fj4QK+zyXjL4j5WI0=; b=gXsig/ cssxGc8XBTfnnq/xVxKCJ1KZk1GC+LFCXjN5KR648scxLGVZKVheDmEjbY95Mnpl UiDwTlPHzzrembEBA4vdLYpA+exi3giPxo0F6OpG5EeJ/FqtUoC+DRO8UvxRWi4j SYI/ZQM63B0LwWl5ouhjh3IXMk7ACMuZqJ42Y= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=dFuIEzeVPaPx8pdKGn4sMDOUHfAgSEgk GnZe9gzGX+bt21Lh/nmhuVtC87lghFANQ2C8jcCmfeTW5n80talaCpYv/xZ/6Dez 0UbWwG5daGI+y7L7g/rjygS9wpq/gC58dZldqWbadCkWhrMaHlrqIWjB3J5iV0Q9 cHRQqmHhFoI= Received: from pb-smtp1.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 97405ABE0F; Sun, 22 Oct 2017 21:19:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [104.132.0.95]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 155BFABE0E; Sun, 22 Oct 2017 21:19:40 -0400 (EDT) From: Junio C Hamano To: Thomas Gummerer Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Jeff King , Jonathan Nieder , "Robert P . J . Day" Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/3] deprecate git stash save References: <20171019183304.26748-2-t.gummerer@gmail.com> <20171022170409.8565-1-t.gummerer@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2017 10:19:38 +0900 In-Reply-To: <20171022170409.8565-1-t.gummerer@gmail.com> (Thomas Gummerer's message of "Sun, 22 Oct 2017 18:04:06 +0100") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.2.50 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 3DF96730-B790-11E7-97F7-8EF31968708C-77302942!pb-smtp1.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Thomas Gummerer writes: > Interdiff below: Thanks. Looks much more polished. > > diff --git a/Documentation/git-stash.txt b/Documentation/git-stash.txt > index 89b6a0e672..8be661007d 100644 > --- a/Documentation/git-stash.txt > +++ b/Documentation/git-stash.txt > @@ -86,7 +86,9 @@ The `--patch` option implies `--keep-index`. You can use > > save [-p|--patch] [-k|--[no-]keep-index] [-u|--include-untracked] [-a|--all] [-q|--quiet] []:: > > - This option is deprecated in favour of 'git stash push'. > + This option is deprecated in favour of 'git stash push'. It > + differs from "stash push" in that it cannot take pathspecs, > + and any non-option arguments form the message. Every time I saw this line, I misread s/form/from/ and got confused. I know the below is what the above wants the readers to eventually [*1*] know: 'git stash save' cannot take pathspecs (nor it can be enhanced with new options in the future) because any non-option argument to it is treated as the message and has been deprecated. 'git stash push' supersedes 'git stash save'; it corrects the command line syntax by requiring '-m' before the message. but I feel that the text in your patch still does not read clearly enough. But it may only be me. Thanks. [Footnote] *1* By "eventually" what I mean is that it may not be necessarily a good idea to lay it out all to the reader here at this point in the document---they may not care why a subcommand is being deprecated, but for those who want to know, we need to write it down somewhere.