Junio C Hamano <gitster AT pobox.com> writes: >> >> HEAD, HEAD~1, HEAD~2 >> >> If the syntax is changed in the middle (as it was in manual page), >> that interrupts the kognitive flow of reading. >> >> HEAD, HEAD^, HEAD~2 >> > > I still would prefer to teach people HEAD^ earlier. Perhaps, but I would let the user to decide how he progresses his learning path. Further, I would welcome if all direct git command manuals used this one (~) notation uniformly everywhere, because it ís the base most likely to ring bells in ones previous knowledge (that is: concept of counting numbers). > If you _REALLY_ insist, I can live with spelling the HEAD~2 as > HEAD^^ for consistency. Thank you. Yes, please. > Wasn't with you that earlier I discussed that very basic things > such as revision naming and range notation should be moved from > rev-list documentation to more central place, and sructure the > documentation in such a way that these should be read even > before individual manual pages are consulted? If we follow > that, then by the time people read these examples, they _ought_ > to know that HEAD~1 is a longer-to-type way to say HEAD^ already. I think it is not wise to not "ought-to"-suppose anything about person's learning path. Learning is not linear and clear cut from point A to B. We have no control of from where one starts, what commands one uses first or which pages one may consult; in which order. It may be that person's first access to git is a web page by a GOOGLE search, magazine article or friend show-off or his own trial and error. In most likelyhood it is not "the golden gem page where everything should start" Jari -- Welcome to FOSS revolution: we fix and modify until it shines - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
