Matthieu Moy wrote:
> I'd put it the other way around: the intuitive explanation first, and
> the technical one after. For people not totally familiar with Git, the
> first part does not make much sense (and when I learn a new tool, I
> really don't like when the doc assumes I already know too much about
> Also, this $HEAD Vs HEAD doesn't seem very clear to me. I don't have a
> really good proposal for a better wording, but maybe replacing $HEAD
> with $branch would make a bit more sense, as having $HEAD != HEAD is
>> +* `simple` - in central workflows, behaves like `upstream`, except
>> + that it errors out unless branch.$HEAD.merge is equal to $HEAD.
> "... except that it errors out if branch.$HEAD.merge is not equal to
> $HEAD." ?
>> + single command. Dangerous, and inappropriate unless you are the
>> + only person updating your push destination.
> Here also, I'd have said "Dangerous, and inappropriate if you are
> not ...".
I might have overplayed the danger a bit, as Junio points out. I'll
have a look at your --force documentation patch.
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