Re: [PATCH] doc: use 'ref' instead of 'commit' for merge-base arguments

From: Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>
To: Bryan Turner <bturner@atlassian.com>
Cc: Takuya N via GitGitGadget <gitgitgadget@gmail.com>,
	Git Users <git@vger.kernel.org>,
	Takuya Noguchi <takninnovationresearch@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] doc: use 'ref' instead of 'commit' for merge-base arguments
Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2020 15:08:08 +0100 (CET)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <nycvar.QRO.7.76.6.2003031507500.46@tvgsbejvaqbjf.bet> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAGyf7-Ez1Fx-VUVmDWxRxLaZcU+Tu4kZ+F2+0uNKkx2oftjEJQ@mail.gmail.com>

Hi,

On Tue, 3 Mar 2020, Bryan Turner wrote:

> On Tue, Mar 3, 2020 at 12:23 AM Takuya N via GitGitGadget
> <gitgitgadget@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > From: Takuya Noguchi <takninnovationresearch@gmail.com>
> >
> > The notation <commit> can be misunderstandable only for commit SHA1,
> > but merge-base accepts any commit references. Like reflog, the name of
> > arguments should be <ref> instead of <commit>.
>
> To me, this change goes too far in the opposite direction: Now it
> sounds like the command only accepts refs, when it actually accepts
> any "commit-ish"--i.e., anything that can be coerced to a commit.
> ("git worktree" uses this term in its usage for "add", for example.)

Maybe we can go for `rev` instead of `ref`?

Ciao,
Dscho