Sergey Organov <> writes:

> Even though "direct ancestor" is not defined in the glossary, the
> common meaning of the term is simply "parent", parents being the only
> direct ancestors, and the rest of ancestors being indirect ancestors.

Makes sense.  If there were distinction among parents of a single
child, perhaps a direct ancestor might be a term to refer to an
ancestor that is reached by following only the special kind of
parent (rather than "side" ancestor that involves at least one hop
of other lessor kind of parent), but there isn't anything like that
in the system, so there is no need to use a confusing and undefined
term here in the documentation.

> As "parent" is obviously wrong in this place in the description, we
> should simply say "ancestor", as everywhere else.

Yup.  Great.

> Signed-off-by: Sergey Organov <>
> ---
>  Documentation/glossary-content.txt | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> diff --git a/Documentation/glossary-content.txt 
> b/Documentation/glossary-content.txt
> index 6b8888d..6c2d23d 100644
> --- a/Documentation/glossary-content.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/glossary-content.txt
> @@ -463,7 +463,7 @@ exclude;;
>  [[def_push]]push::
>       Pushing a <<def_branch,branch>> means to get the branch's
>       <<def_head_ref,head ref>> from a remote <<def_repository,repository>>,
> -     find out if it is a direct ancestor to the branch's local
> +     find out if it is an ancestor to the branch's local
>       head ref, and in that case, putting all
>       objects, which are <<def_reachable,reachable>> from the local
>       head ref, and which are missing from the remote

Reply via email to