Johannes Sixt <j6t@xxxxxxxx> writes: >> - Apply the patch to both the index and the working tree (or >> - merely check that it would apply cleanly to both if `--check` is >> - in effect). Note that `--index` expects index entries and >> - working tree copies for relevant paths to be identical (their >> - contents and metadata such as file mode must match), and will >> - raise an error if they are not, even if the patch would apply >> - cleanly to both the index and the working tree in isolation. >> + After making sure the paths the patch touches in the working >> + tree have no modifications relative to their index entries, >> + apply the patch both to the index entries and to the working >> + tree files or see if it applies cleanly, when `--check` is in >> + effect. > > I don't think that this is an improvement. The purpose of --index *is* > to apply the patch to both index and worktree, and that should be > mentioned first. The check that both are identical, is a prerequisite > and not the primary objective of the option. Yeah, but this was an attempt to clarify what that "apply to both", which is the central part of the operation, exactly means. The only mode of operation we offer is that we start from identical index and working tree, and make the same change so that we arrive at the same outcome. It is not like you can have some changes in the working tree file as long as they do not overlap and collide with the incoming patch, make the same change with the patch to arrive at different contents as the outcome. We explicitly forbid that, but "apply to both" does not exactly tell it to the readers. But I am OK to drop this, if you do not think it clarifies the description. Thanks.
