SZEDER Gábor <szeder.dev@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Fri, Nov 15, 2019 at 03:07:59PM +0900, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> Denton Liu <liu.denton@xxxxxxxxx> writes: >> >> > +* 'reference' >> > + >> > + <abbrev hash> (<title line>, <short author date>) >> >> s/title line/title/ as you definitely do *not* want a line with a >> title on it (and nothing else) in this context. > > Well, we just followed suit of the descriptions of other pretty > formats, and they all say "<title line>". > > On a related note, the description of the '%s' format specifier in the > same document is "subject", not "title". Perhaps they should be made > consistent, but I'm not sure. I like that '%s' means "subject", > because the first letter matches, but some man pages (commit, > format-patch, am) make difference between a subject and a title. Yeah, I think these are used more or less interchangeably, and we may want to clarify the distinction. Between the two, <title> is a more appropriate "context neutral" name for the thing, i.e. one line (technically, one paragraph) summary of what the commit is about. Where <subject> becomes more relevant is when a commit is expressed as a piece of patch e-mail, where <title> is used on the "Subject: " header. Thanks.
