On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 3:35 PM, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
<avarab@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> The documentation for the fsck.<msg-id> and receive.fsck.<msg-id>
> variables was mostly duplicated in two places, with fsck.<msg-id>
> making no mention of the corresponding receive.fsck.<msg-id>, and the
> same for fsck.skipList.
> [...]
> Rectify this situation by describing the feature in general terms
> under the fsck.* documentation, and make the receive.fsck.*
> documentation refer to those variables instead.
> [...]
> Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> diff --git a/Documentation/config.txt b/Documentation/config.txt
> @@ -1554,23 +1554,41 @@ filter.<driver>.smudge::
> fsck.skipList::
> - The path to a sorted list of object names (i.e. one SHA-1 per
> - line) that are known to be broken in a non-fatal way and should
> - be ignored. This feature is useful when an established project
> - should be accepted despite early commits containing errors that
> - can be safely ignored such as invalid committer email addresses.
> - Note: corrupt objects cannot be skipped with this setting.
> + Like `fsck.<msg-id>` this variable has a corresponding
> + `receive.fsck.skipList` variant.
> ++
> +The path to a sorted list of object names (i.e. one SHA-1 per line)
> +that are known to be broken in a non-fatal way and should be
> +ignored. This feature is useful when an established project should be
> +accepted despite early commits containing errors that can be safely
> +ignored such as invalid committer email addresses. Note: corrupt
> +objects cannot be skipped with this setting.
Nit: This organization seems backward. Typically, one would describe
what the option is for and then add the incidental note ("Like
fsck.<...>, this variable...") at the end. It's not clear why this
patch demotes the description to a secondary paragraph and considers
the incidental note as primary.
