On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 3:11 AM, Jakub Narębski <jna...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> In order to just pick and use the more appropriate one (or a useful
>> combination of the two), a clean description of what each of them do
>> without historical cruft is more readable and useful, isn't it?  I
>> would expect that most of them who are newly configuring a system
>> would pick COMMON one and override per instance as needed, without
>> touching the SYSTEM one (fallback default) after reading the above,
>> and that is what we want to happen.
>> Do you think sysadmins need a history lesson to understand why there
>> are two different possibilities?
> [...]
>> I think the new text conveys the necessary information to the
>> intended audience with more clarity without the history lesson or
>> the record of your past frustration. Am I mistaken?
> Note also that this is about *gitweb/INSTALL*, which is meant to be
> *short* and succint description on how to install gitweb, and not
> about the reference documentation: gitweb(1) or gitweb.conf(5).
> Description of historical behavior (and backward compatibility)
> has place (if any) in manpages, not gitweb/INSTALL.
> --
> Jakub Narębski

Let us then agree that it should be mentioned somewhere in
gitweb.conf.txt then (as it currently is not).

-Drew Northup
"As opposed to vegetable or mineral error?"
-John Pescatore, SANS NewsBites Vol. 12 Num. 59
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