Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> Change an example for `git branch <pattern>` to say `git branch
> <branchname>` to be consistent with the synopsis. This changes
> documentation added in d8d33736b5 ("branch: allow pattern arguments",
> 2011-08-28).
>
> Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> Documentation/git-branch.txt | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/git-branch.txt b/Documentation/git-branch.txt
> index 092f1bcf9f..e65e5c0dee 100644
> --- a/Documentation/git-branch.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/git-branch.txt
> @@ -142,7 +142,7 @@ This option is only applicable in non-verbose mode.
> List both remote-tracking branches and local branches.
>
> --list::
> - Activate the list mode. `git branch <pattern>` would try to create a branch,
> + Activate the list mode. `git branch <branchname>` would try to create a branch,
> use `git branch --list <pattern>` to list matching branches.
This makes the description more correct.
I am not sure if it makes that much sense to have that sentence here
in the first place (after all, it is describing a behaviour of a
mode that is *not* the list mode), but I guess that it may be a
common mistake to forget to specify "-l" while asking for branches
that match the pattern? If we were writing this today from scratch,
I would perhaps write something entirely different, e.g.
--list::
List branches. With optional <pattern>... at the
end of the command line, list only the branches that
match any of the given patterns. Do not forget '-l'
and say "git branch <pattern>", as it will instead
try to create a new branch whose name is <pattern>,
which is a common mistake.
though.
Thanks.