Steven Rostedt <> writes:

>> > 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?
>> The audience of Git these days are far more widely spread than the
>> kernel circle.  I am not opposed to _helping_ those who happen to
>> know "patch", but I was against a description that assumes readers
>> know it, i.e. making it a requirement to know "patch" to understand
>> "apply".
> Patch is used by much more than just the kernel folks ;-)  I've been
> using patch much longer than I've been doing kernel development.

Yeah, I was familiar with "patch" when I started Git, too ;-).

But only folks in the kernel circle will be told by Linus the
similarity between apply and patch, no?

In any case...

>> In other words, your enhancement to the documentation could go like:
>>      ... By default, ... With this option, you will additionally
>>      see such and such and such in the output (this is similar to
>>      what "patch --dry-run" would give you).  See the EXAMPLES
>>      section to get a feel of how it looks like.
>> and I would not be opposed, as long as "such and such and such" are
>> written in such a way that the reader does not have to have a prior
>> experience with GNU patch in order to understand it.

... I forgot to also add: And by mentioning "similar to", people who
are familiar with "patch" are also helped by their pre-existing
knowledge, so both kinds of people win.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Reply via email to