Ivan Shapovalov <intelfx@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: >> > --update-refs:: >> > --no-update-refs:: >> > +--update-refs=interactive:: >> >> Based on `git grep -e '--.*\[=' Documentation/git-*.txt`, I think this >> should be more like >> >> --update-refs[=interactive]:: >> --no-update-refs:: >> >> But maybe that unintentionally suggests that `=interactive` is the default? > > Perhaps --update-refs[=(yes|no|interactive)] then? Or is that too > verbose? If `--update-refs` does take values that the git_parse_maybe_bool() helper parses as a Boolean value, I do not think the above is verbose at all. Rather, it is a disservice to the users if the documentation does not mention yes/no in such a case. I'd say listing other Boolean synonyms like yes/true/on/no/false/off is too verbose, though ;-). > Anyway, I don't have a preference, I'll just do what I'm told That is not quite in line with how we'd like to operate. It is your itch. Others may give suggestions to help you polish it, but ultimately, we would not want to accept a patch that the author does not agree with. Thanks.
