Johannes Sixt <j6t@xxxxxxxx> writes: > -1:: > --base:: > -2:: > --ours:: > -3:: > --theirs:: > ... > Next, since with such a scheme all options are treated equally, we have > to ask whether the description in the body text makes sufficiently clear > that they not all do the same thing (it does), that there are actually 3 > distinct groups (it does), and which options mean the same thing. The > latter is rather meh, but it is the fault of the text and can be > remedied easily. OK, with that, making the 6 as the heading at the same level becomes feasible and the most simple. > Finally, with all this considered, I think it is not so bad at all that > all options are lumped together in a single line (or remain on six > separate header lines, depending on the processor). Yup. Sounds good.
