rebase docs: drop stray word in merge command description
diff mbox series

Message ID 20181208231541.1341999-1-kyle@kyleam.com
State New
Headers show
Series
  • rebase docs: drop stray word in merge command description
Related show

Commit Message

Kyle Meyer Dec. 8, 2018, 11:15 p.m. UTC
Delete a misplaced word introduced by caafecfcf1 (rebase
--rebase-merges: adjust man page for octopus support, 2018-03-09).

Signed-off-by: Kyle Meyer <kyle@kyleam.com>
---
 Documentation/git-rebase.txt | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

Comments

Johannes Schindelin Dec. 9, 2018, 7:41 p.m. UTC | #1
Hi Kyle,

On Sat, 8 Dec 2018, Kyle Meyer wrote:

> Delete a misplaced word introduced by caafecfcf1 (rebase
> --rebase-merges: adjust man page for octopus support, 2018-03-09).
> 
> Signed-off-by: Kyle Meyer <kyle@kyleam.com>

ACK.

Too bad this did not make it into v2.20.0, but at least it can make it
into a future version.

Thanks,
Johannes

> ---
>  Documentation/git-rebase.txt | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/git-rebase.txt b/Documentation/git-rebase.txt
> index dff17b3178..2ee535fb23 100644
> --- a/Documentation/git-rebase.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/git-rebase.txt
> @@ -979,7 +979,7 @@ when the merge operation did not even start), it is rescheduled immediately.
>  
>  At this time, the `merge` command will *always* use the `recursive`
>  merge strategy for regular merges, and `octopus` for octopus merges,
> -strategy, with no way to choose a different one. To work around
> +with no way to choose a different one. To work around
>  this, an `exec` command can be used to call `git merge` explicitly,
>  using the fact that the labels are worktree-local refs (the ref
>  `refs/rewritten/onto` would correspond to the label `onto`, for example).
> -- 
> 2.19.2
> 
>
Junio C Hamano Dec. 10, 2018, 3:31 a.m. UTC | #2
Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> writes:

> Hi Kyle,
>
> On Sat, 8 Dec 2018, Kyle Meyer wrote:
>
>> Delete a misplaced word introduced by caafecfcf1 (rebase
>> --rebase-merges: adjust man page for octopus support, 2018-03-09).
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Kyle Meyer <kyle@kyleam.com>
>
> ACK.

Thanks.

> Too bad this did not make it into v2.20.0, but at least it can make it
> into a future version.

The right way to fix it is to prepare a topic that can be merged
down to the 2.19.x track, and proceed normally to percolate it down
via 'next', 'master' and 'maint' as any other fixes.  That is
already happening.

The original documentation bug is older than where the 2.20 track
forked; the bug is in 2.19.  Any such old bugs, users have survived
without it being fixed for a cycle already, and the fix is not that
urgent to interrupt the release engineering that is already underway
and redo it.

A regression that appears only in -rc and a known bug in a new
feature that appears only in -rc are different matters.  It is
prudent to always first access how serious they are and we must be
prepared to even delay the final as necessary.  But I do not think
this one is.
Johannes Schindelin Dec. 10, 2018, 8:27 a.m. UTC | #3
Hi Junio,

On Mon, 10 Dec 2018, Junio C Hamano wrote:

> Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> writes:
> 
> > Hi Kyle,
> >
> > On Sat, 8 Dec 2018, Kyle Meyer wrote:
> >
> >> Delete a misplaced word introduced by caafecfcf1 (rebase
> >> --rebase-merges: adjust man page for octopus support, 2018-03-09).
> >> 
> >> Signed-off-by: Kyle Meyer <kyle@kyleam.com>
> >
> > ACK.
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> > Too bad this did not make it into v2.20.0, but at least it can make it
> > into a future version.
> 
> The right way to fix it is to prepare a topic that can be merged
> down to the 2.19.x track, and proceed normally to percolate it down
> via 'next', 'master' and 'maint' as any other fixes.  That is
> already happening.
> 
> The original documentation bug is older than where the 2.20 track
> forked; the bug is in 2.19.  Any such old bugs, users have survived
> without it being fixed for a cycle already, and the fix is not that
> urgent to interrupt the release engineering that is already underway
> and redo it.
> 
> A regression that appears only in -rc and a known bug in a new
> feature that appears only in -rc are different matters.  It is
> prudent to always first access how serious they are and we must be
> prepared to even delay the final as necessary.  But I do not think
> this one is.

You are right, of course, this was not as critical a bug fix as others you
integrated last minute.

Thanks,
Dscho

Patch
diff mbox series

diff --git a/Documentation/git-rebase.txt b/Documentation/git-rebase.txt
index dff17b3178..2ee535fb23 100644
--- a/Documentation/git-rebase.txt
+++ b/Documentation/git-rebase.txt
@@ -979,7 +979,7 @@  when the merge operation did not even start), it is rescheduled immediately.
 
 At this time, the `merge` command will *always* use the `recursive`
 merge strategy for regular merges, and `octopus` for octopus merges,
-strategy, with no way to choose a different one. To work around
+with no way to choose a different one. To work around
 this, an `exec` command can be used to call `git merge` explicitly,
 using the fact that the labels are worktree-local refs (the ref
 `refs/rewritten/onto` would correspond to the label `onto`, for example).