On Tue, 20 Aug 2013 12:07:18 -0700
Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com> wrote:

> Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortma...@windriver.com> writes:
> > OK, so given your feedback, how do you feel about a patch to the
> > documentation that indicates to use "-v" in combination with the
> > "--check" to get equivalent "patch --dry-run" behaviour?   If that
> > had existed, I'd have not gone rummaging around in the source, so
> > that should be good enough to help others avoid the same...
> I do not think it is necessarily a good idea to assume that people
> who are learning "git apply" know how GNU patch works.

Linus told me that "git apply" was basically a replacement for patch.
Why would you think it would not be a good idea to assume that people
would not be familiar with how GNU patch works?

Is it because you expect "git apply" to eventually replace patch all
out, and want no dependencies on its knowledge?

-- Steve

> But I do agree that the description of -v, --verbose has a lot of
> room for improvement.
>       Report progress to stderr. By default, only a message about the
>       current patch being applied will be printed. This option will cause
>       additional information to be reported.
> It is totally unclear what "additional information" is reported at
> all.
> Thanks.

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