| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author |
|---|
|
- Switch the synopsis to a synopsis block which will automatically
format placeholders in italics and keywords in monospace
- Use _<placeholder>_ instead of <placeholder> in the description
- Use `backticks` for keywords and more complex option
descriptions. The new rendering engine will apply synopsis rules to
these spans.
Signed-off-by: Jean-Noël Avila <jn.avila@free.fr>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
|
|
Documentation updates.
* je/doc-push-upstream:
doc: git-push: add explanation of `git push origin main`
doc: git-push: clarify "what to push"
doc: git-push: clarify "where to push"
doc: add an UPSTREAM BRANCHES section to pull/push/fetch
doc: git-push: clarify intro
|
|
What happens if you run `git push` without any arguments is actually
extremely complex to explain, as discussed in the previous commit.
But it's very easy to explain what `git push <remote> <branch>` does, so
start the man page by explaining what that does.
The hope is that someone could just stop reading the man page here and
never learn anything else about `git push`, and that would be fine.
Signed-off-by: Julia Evans <julia@jvns.ca>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
|
|
From user feedback: 6 users says they found the "what to push"
paragraphs confusing, for many different reasons, including:
* what does "..." in <refspec>... mean?
* "consult XXX configuration" is hard to parse
* it refers to the `git-config` man page even though the config
information for `git push` is included in this man page under
CONFIGURATION
* the default ("push to a branch with the same name") is what they use
99% of the time, they would have expected it to appear earlier instead
of at the very end
* not understanding what the term "upstream" means in Git
("are branches tracked by some system besides their names?"")
Also, the current explanation of `push.default=simple` ("the
current branch is pushed to the corresponding upstream branch, but
as a safety measure, the push is aborted if the upstream branch
does not have the same name as the local one.") is not accurate:
`push.default=simple` does not always require you to set a corresponding
upstream branch.
Address all of these by
* using a numbered "in order of precedence" list
* giving a more accurate explanation of how `push.default=simple` works
* giving a little bit of context around "upstream branch": it's
something that you may have to set explicitly
* referring to the new UPSTREAM BRANCHES section
The default behaviour is still discussed pretty late but it should be
easier to skim now to get to the relevant information.
In "`git push` may fail if...", I'm intentionally being vague about
what exactly `git push` does, because (as discussed on the mailing list)
the behaviour of `push.default=simple` is very confusing, perhaps broken,
and certainly not worth trying to explain in an introductory context.
`push.default.simple` sometimes requires you to set an upstream and
sometimes doesn't and the exact conditions under which it does/doesn't
are hard to describe.
Signed-off-by: Julia Evans <julia@jvns.ca>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
|
|
It's not obvious that "`branch.*.remote` configuration"` refers to the
upstream, so say "upstream" instead.
The sentence is also quite hard to parse right now, use "defaults to" to
simplify it.
Signed-off-by: Julia Evans <julia@jvns.ca>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
|
|
From user feedback, 5 users are unsure what "ref" and/or "objects" means
in this context. 3 users said they don't know what "complete the refs"
means.
Many users also commented that receive hooks do not seem like the most
important thing to know about `git push`, and that this information
should not be the second sentence in the man page.
Use more familiar language to make it more accessible to users who do
not know what a "ref" is and move the "hooks" comment to the end.
Signed-off-by: Julia Evans <julia@jvns.ca>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
|
|
From user feedback, there was a request for examples, as well as a
comment that one person found "If git push [<repository>] without
any <refspec> argument is set to update some ref at the destination
with <src> with remote.<repository>.push configuration variable..."
impossible to understand.
To make the section easier to navigate, create a list of every possible
refspec form, with examples for each form as well as 2 forms which were
previously missing (patterns and negative refspecs).
Made a few changes to use more familiar language, but ultimately
refspecs are a pretty advanced feature so I've mostly left the
terminology alone.
Signed-off-by: Julia Evans <julia@jvns.ca>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
|
|
Right now the rules for when a `git push` is allowed are buried at the
bottom of the description of `<refspec>`. Put them in their own section
so that we can reference them from `--force` and give some context for
why they exist.
Having the "PUSH RULES" section also lets us be a little bit more
specific with the rule in `--force`: we can just focus on the rule
for pushing for a branch (which is likely the one that's most relevant)
and leave the details about what happens when you push to a tag or a ref
that isn't a branch to the later section.
Signed-off-by: Julia Evans <julia@jvns.ca>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
|
|
For better searchability, this commit adds a check to ensure that parameters
expressed in the form of `--[no-]parameter` are not used in the
documentation. In the place of such parameters, the documentation should
list two separate parameters: `--parameter` and `--no-parameter`.
Signed-off-by: Jean-Noël Avila <jn.avila@free.fr>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
|
|
We presently use the ".txt" extension for our AsciiDoc files. While not
wrong, most editors do not associate this extension with AsciiDoc,
meaning that contributors don't get automatic editor functionality that
could be useful, such as syntax highlighting and prose linting.
It is much more common to use the ".adoc" extension for AsciiDoc files,
since this helps editors automatically detect files and also allows
various forges to provide rich (HTML-like) rendering. Let's do that
here, renaming all of the files and updating the includes where
relevant. Adjust the various build scripts and makefiles to use the new
extension as well.
Note that this should not result in any user-visible changes to the
documentation.
Signed-off-by: brian m. carlson <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
|
