Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > Making the last one into the third bullet item, e.g. > > - Use OID instead of SHA-1, as we support different hashing > algorithems these days. > > would have been even easier to follow, but I'll let it pass. Easy enough to change for me; this will be addressed in the next iteration. > In prose, "object name" would flow better than OID (the original > would say not just "SHA-1" but use "SHA-1 hash" or somesuch in such > a context), I would think. When used as a placeholder, OID would be > perfectly fine (<oid>, where we used to write <hash> or <sha-1> or > <SHA-1>). I've used 'apostrophes' to set off these terms (found as literals in the documentation that's changed) and explained/expanded 'OID' in the commit message. >> -s:: >> --hash[=<n>]:: >> >> - Only show the SHA-1 hash, not the reference name. When combined with >> - --dereference the dereferenced tag will still be shown after the SHA-1. >> + Only show the OID, not the reference name. When combined with >> + `--dereference`, the dereferenced tag will still be shown after the OID. > > Not a problem you created, but I noticed we do not explain what > "=<n>" up there does. Given I also don't know what it means, I'll let you spin this off into a separate bug report however you see fit :-) Just based on the diff context available above, it's odd to me also that `-s` apparently does not take an `<n>` -- whatever that may be. > Everything else looked great in this step. Thanks for working on this. Always a pleasure :-) Thanks for the review. -- Sean Allred
