"lilinchao@xxxxxxxxxx" <lilinchao@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> like this:
>
> diff --git a/apply.c b/apply.c
> index 44bc31d6eb..0b353af96c 100644
> --- a/apply.c
> +++ b/apply.c
> @@ -5024,7 +5024,7 @@ int apply_parse_options(int argc, const char **argv,
> OPT_BOOL(0, "apply", force_apply,
> N_("also apply the patch (use with --stat/--summary/--check)")),
> OPT_BOOL('3', "3way", &state->threeway,
> - N_( "attempt three-way merge, fall back on normal patch if that fails")),
> + N_( "attempt three-way merge, fall back on normal patch if that fails(implies --index)")),
> OPT_FILENAME(0, "build-fake-ancestor", &state->fake_ancestor,
> N_("build a temporary index based on embedded index information")),
> /* Think twice before adding "--nul" synonym to this */
It is not incorrect per-se, but because "--3way" implies "--index"
only when "--cached" is not in effect, it may do more harm than it
helps to mention only just the "--index" half of the story.
If we were to touch that line, I'd just chop off "if that fails" at
the end---the phrase "fall back" already tells readers that it happens
only when the non-fallback action does not work.
Thanks.
