Re: [PATCH] doc/config: do a better job of introducing 'worktree.guessRemote'
- Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2019 13:19:39 -0500
- From: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] doc/config: do a better job of introducing 'worktree.guessRemote'
On Sun, Jan 6, 2019 at 1:09 PM Thomas Gummerer <t.gummerer@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 12/23, Eric Sunshine wrote:
> > The documentation for this option jumps right in with "With `add`",
> > without explaining that `add` is a sub-command of "git worktree".
> > Together with rather odd grammatical structure of the remainder of the
> > sentence, the description can be difficult for newcomers to understand.
> > Clarify by improving the grammar and mentioning "git worktree add"
> > explicitly.
> Thanks, this reads much better indeed. I was briefly wondering if a
> similar change is needed in the documentation for the 'git worktree'
> command itself. It currently reads:
> With `worktree add <path>`, without `<commit-ish>`, instead
> of creating a new branch from HEAD, if there exists a tracking
> branch in exactly one remote matching the basename of `<path>`,
> base the new branch on the remote-tracking branch, and mark
> the remote-tracking branch as "upstream" from the new branch.
> I do think the documentation for the config option is slightly easier
> to read, especially with your improvements below. Dunno if it's worth
> adjusting the test in the 'git worktree' documentation as well?
Such a change to git-worktree.txt could be done, though I think it's
outside the scope of this patch since "With ...," is not nearly so
confusing in the context of git-worktree.txt given that the reader
_knows_ that he/she is reading (exclusively) about "git worktree".
Also, almost all of the options in git-worktree.txt are phrased "With
...,", so such a change would be more all-encompassing.