On Tue, Oct 5, 2021 at 10:05 PM Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 06/10/21 02.42, Johannes Altmanninger wrote: > > I wasn't sure whether to add backticks to status.renames because we are > > already inconsistent in this file (search for "config option"). > > Anyway I agree that backticks look better here (makes it bold in the man page). > > > > Maybe we should automate this? We can write a test that makes sure that we > > always use backticks around config keys, at least for new changes. > > > > --- > > > > I didn't add backticks to "copies" to be consistent with this part before the context > > > > Ignore changes to submodules when looking for changes. <when> can be > > either "none", "untracked", "dirty" or "all", which is the default. > > > > I think for consistency, we can go with automated style changes that use > backticks to monospace: > - file name and paths > - daemons/services > - configuration names and values > - file content (use ```...``` block unless inline) > - command-line > - keyboard keys (dunno?) > - any other inline text that needs to be written exactly > > I have seen many times articles that say `Run "foo bar" (no quotes)` > when they mean `Run `foo bar``. > > For the exception you mentioned above it can be monospaced as part of > automated change above. Doing some cleanup passes on the documentation files would probably be a good thing, but it'd probably belong in a different series. Better to keep this one focused on the fixes being proposed.
