Richard Hansen <> writes:

> On 2013-09-03 18:46, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> I hate to say this after seeing you doing a thorough job in this
>> series, but because "tree-ish" and "commit-ish" are both made-up
>> words, I have a feeling that we are better off unifying to the
>> dashed form, which unfortunately is the other way around from what
>> your series does.
> I thought you might say that so I held on to the commits that
> standardize on tree-ish and commit-ish in my local repo.  :)
> This series still says "tree-ish (also treeish)" and "commit-ish (also
> committish)" in gitglossary(7).  Would you like me to eliminate the
> "(also ...)"  part?
> I'm not 100% confident that these don't break translations, although
> it still builds and "make test" passes.

We will find out ;-)

> Changes since v2:
>   * standardize on 'tree-ish' instead of 'treeish'
>   * standardize on 'commit-ish' instead of 'committish'
> Richard Hansen (7):
>   glossary: mention 'treeish' as an alternative to 'tree-ish'
>   glossary: define commit-ish (a.k.a. committish)
>   use 'tree-ish' instead of 'treeish'
>   use 'commit-ish' instead of 'committish'
>   glossary: more precise definition of tree-ish (a.k.a. treeish)
>   revisions.txt: fix and clarify <rev>^{<type>}
>   glossary: fix and clarify the definition of 'ref'
>  Documentation/RelNotes/          |  2 +-
>  Documentation/howto/revert-branch-rebase.txt |  2 +-

I generally prefer not to touch historical documents but the change
in this series is small enough that I think it is OK.

Thanks, will queue.
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