On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 11:55:09AM -0500, Drew Northup wrote:
> > So we should always use "<path>" for exact path, and "<pathspec>" for
> > pathspecs patterns as defined in gitglossary. I think it's better
> > to avoid "<paths>" and always use "<path>..." or "<pathspec>..."
> I suspect that the only reason why the differentiation between
> "<path>" and "<paths>" happened is because there may be some places
> where it was seen that a _list of paths_ was acceptable (which isn't a
> pathspec, as it isn't a search expression) and other places where

<paths> is usually used for a list of <pathspec>, not just a list of <path>.

> _only_ a single path was acceptable. Should that fail to be the case
> then there would be a good argument for changing the affected
> instances of "<paths>" to "<path>" in the documentation. (I know of no
> other good way to pluralize "<path>" myself.)

I think it's best to just add "...":

<path> for single exact path,
<path>... for a list of exact paths,
<pathspec> for single pathspec,
<pathspec>... for a list of pathspecs.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to