From: "Marc Branchaud" <marcnarc@xxxxxxxxxxx>
On 2016-07-11 04:25 PM, Philip Oakley wrote:
While there, also break out the other shorthand notations and
add a title for the revision range summary (which also appears
in git-rev-parse, so keep it mixed case).
Signed-off-by: Philip Oakley <philipoakley@xxxxxxx>
---
Documentation/revisions.txt | 23 +++++++++++++++++------
1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/revisions.txt b/Documentation/revisions.txt
index 79f6d03..1c59e87 100644
--- a/Documentation/revisions.txt
+++ b/Documentation/revisions.txt
@@ -242,35 +242,46 @@ specifying a single revision with the notation
described in the
previous section means the set of commits reachable from that
commit, following the commit ancestry chain.
+The '{caret}' (caret) notation
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
To exclude commits reachable from a commit, a prefix '{caret}'
notation is used. E.g. '{caret}r1 r2' means commits reachable
from 'r2' but exclude the ones reachable from 'r1'.
All of these headings render poorly in the manpage, at least for me
(Ubuntu 16.04). Only the first word appears in bold; the '-quoted text is
not bold but underlined, and the rest of the header is plain.
Which doc package is that with? It had formatted OK for the html web pages.
Also, I think calling this "The ^ notation" is confusing, because there's
already an earlier paragraph on the "<rev>^" syntax.
Yes, I noticed that after sending. Maybe "^<rev>" (i.e. include the <rev>
part) to show that its a prefix not a suffix
Maybe we don't need a header here? I only suggest that because I'm having
trouble coming up with a nice alternative. "Commit Exclusion"?
Part of the earlier discussions as about avoiding new termininologies just
for the sake of it.
-This set operation appears so often that there is a shorthand
+The '..' (two-dot) range notation
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Perhaps "Range notation", to mirror the capitalization of "Symmetric
Difference" in the next header?
OK
+The '{caret}r1 r2' set operation appears so often that there is a
shorthand
for it. When you have two commits 'r1' and 'r2' (named according
to the syntax explained in SPECIFYING REVISIONS above), you can ask
for commits that are reachable from r2 excluding those that are
reachable
from r1 by '{caret}r1 r2' and it can be written as 'r1..r2'.
+The '...' (three dot) Symmetric Difference notation
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
A similar notation 'r1\...r2' is called symmetric difference
of 'r1' and 'r2' and is defined as
'r1 r2 --not $(git merge-base --all r1 r2)'.
It is the set of commits that are reachable from either one of
'r1' (Left side) or 'r2' (Right side) but not from both.
-In these two shorthands, you can omit one end and let it default to
HEAD.
+In these two shorthand notations, you can omit one end and let it
default to HEAD.
For example, 'origin..' is a shorthand for 'origin..HEAD' and asks
"What
did I do since I forked from the origin branch?" Similarly, '..origin'
is a shorthand for 'HEAD..origin' and asks "What did the origin do
since
I forked from them?" Note that '..' would mean 'HEAD..HEAD' which is
an
empty range that is both reachable and unreachable from HEAD.
Unfortunately the new headings make it appear that this paragraph is
exclusively part of the '...' notation section. Folks reading the '..'
section are likely to skip it.
OK
I like the examples, though. I think it would be worthwhile to remove
this paragraph and fold it explicitly into the '..' and '...' notation
sections.
So add something like this to the '..' section (only the first sentence
here is new):
Either r1 or r2 can be omitted, in which case HEAD is used as
the default. For example, 'origin..' is a shorthand for
'origin..HEAD' and asks "What did I do since I forked from the
origin branch?" Similarly, '..origin' is a shorthand for
'HEAD..origin' and asks "What did the origin do since I forked
from them?" Note that '..' would mean 'HEAD..HEAD' which is an
empty range that is both reachable and unreachable from HEAD.
And also, add the same first sentence and a different example to the '...'
section. Something like this:
Either r1 or r2 can be omitted, in which case HEAD is used as
the default. For example, 'origin...' is a shorthand for
'origin...HEAD' and asks "What have I and origin both done
since I forked from the origin branch?" Note that 'origin...'
and '...origin' ask the same question.
+Additional '{caret}' Shorthand notations
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Two other shorthands for naming a set that is formed by a commit
-and its parent commits exist. The 'r1{caret}@' notation means all
-parents of 'r1'. 'r1{caret}!' includes commit 'r1' but excludes
-all of its parents.
+and its parent commits exist.
I think descriptions of <rev>^@ and <rev>^! should live under the main
description of <rev>^. That part already describes the numeric suffix, so
describing a couple of special suffixes there seems like a natural fit.
Isn't it that these are ranges of commits, rather than a single commit, so
would go in this part of the docs, but I see your point.
However, if you choose to keep this little section, you need to move the
word "exist" earlier in the sentence:
OK.
Two other shorthands exist for naming a set that is formed
by a commit and its parent commits.
-To summarize:
+The 'r1{caret}@' notation means all parents of 'r1'.
+
+'r1{caret}!' includes commit 'r1' but excludes all of its parents.
+
+Revision Range Summary
+----------------------
I think this should be a sub-heading (~~~~~~~), not a top-level heading.
In the contect of the other pages it's included in, the use of lower case,
is the next down level. ALL CAPS would be the top level heading.
I'll review.
--
Philip
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html