Re: What's cooking in git.git (Feb 2010, #06; Tue, 23)

[Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>]

Nicolas Pitre <nico@fluxnic.net> writes:

> On Tue, 23 Feb 2010, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
>> * ne/pack-local-doc (2010-02-18) 1 commit
>>  - Documentation: pack-objects: Clarify --local's semantics.
>> 
>> Comments from pack experts?
>
> The patch is fine in the sense that what it modifies was indeed wrong.
>
> However the "even if it appears in the standard input" formulation 
> should also be fixed as the object list may be specified with a rev spec 
> on the command line, and not necessarily only via standard input.

Ah, true.  Perhaps something like this.

-- >8 --
Subject: pack-objects documentation: reword "objects that appear in the standard input"

These were written back when we always read objects from the standard
input.  These days --revs and its friends can feed only the start and
end points and have the command internally enumerate the objects.

Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
---
 Documentation/git-pack-objects.txt |    6 +++---
 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/Documentation/git-pack-objects.txt b/Documentation/git-pack-objects.txt
index 769f1de..1deaa65 100644
--- a/Documentation/git-pack-objects.txt
+++ b/Documentation/git-pack-objects.txt
@@ -120,12 +120,12 @@ base-name::
 
 --incremental::
 	This flag causes an object already in a pack to be ignored
-	even if it appears in the standard input.
+	even if it would have otherwise been packed.
 
 --local::
 	This flag causes an object that is borrowed from an alternate
-	object store to be ignored even if it appears in the standard
-	input.
+	object store to be ignored even if it would have otherwise been
+	packed.
 
 --non-empty::
         Only create a packed archive if it would contain at