Thanks for the quick response.
> I have a few more questions regarding contributions. > I have seen that some command documentations lack consistent synopsis compared to other commands. > Is it on purpose or are improvements to those documentations welcome ? That's hard to answer, as what you perceive as "lack consistent" may or may not be consistent from other people's perspective, without a concrete "here is the comparison I am talking about, and this makes the two comparable" patch.
Here is an example. The synopsis of command `send-email` vs synopsis of `commit`: ``` git send-email [<options>] <file|directory>… git send-email [<options>] <format-patch options> git send-email --dump-aliases ``` ``` git commit [-a | --interactive | --patch] [-s] [-v] [-u<mode>] [--amend] [--dry-run] [(-c | -C | --squash) <commit> | --fixup [(amend|reword):]<commit>)] [-F <file> | -m <msg>] [--reset-author] [--allow-empty] [--allow-empty-message] [--no-verify] [-e] [--author=<author>] [--date=<date>] [--cleanup=<mode>] [--[no-]status] [-i | -o] [--pathspec-from-file=<file> [--pathspec-file-nul]] [(--trailer <token>[(=|:)<value>])…] [-S[<keyid>]] [--] [<pathspec>…] ``` The `commit` synopsis has a more verbose overview of all the options available compared to `send-email` synopsis.
