[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#14976: [patch] use semicolons in option descriptions, not periods
From: |
Pádraig Brady |
Subject: |
bug#14976: [patch] use semicolons in option descriptions, not periods |
Date: |
Sun, 04 Aug 2013 11:54:42 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130110 Thunderbird/17.0.2 |
On 08/04/2013 10:12 AM, Benno Schulenberg wrote:
>
> Hello Pádraig,
>
> On Sat, Aug 3, 2013, at 18:08, Pádraig Brady wrote:
>> - -d, --directory list directory entries instead of contents,
>> - and do not dereference symbolic links
>> + -d, --directory list just names of directories, not their
>> contents
>>
>> So I was wondering why that clarification was added.
>> I guess that it's obvious from the output for -l and -F
>> that the symlink is being operated on: [...]
>> whereas with -d it's not: [...]
>
> Okay, I see. Although I still think it's an unneeded detail in a
> help text, the addition of "by default" makes it better.
>
>> Also I don't like the "just names" in the new description as
>> it might imply that it overrides -l or something.
>
> Well, the phrase was taken from the info documentation, where it says:
> "List just the names of directories, [...] rather than listing their
> contents." :) But I see your point.
>
> The thing is, I have to read the phrase three times before I realize
> that "directory entries" does not mean "entries OF directories" but
> "entries that ARE directories". The problematic word is "entries",
> which makes me think of "items in a container", whereas in fact it
> refers to "items on the command line", which requires some stretch
> of the imagination.
>
> So I propose the following change:
>
> - -d, --directory list directory entries instead of contents,
> + -d, --directory list directories themselves, not their contents,
better thanks.
> (Oh, by the way, when you modify a patch, please make a note of this
> in the log message -- I don't like to see changes that I would never
> have made booked without further ado under my name.)
>
> For the tail --follow thingy I have the following suggestion:
>
> - -f and --follow[=descriptor] are equivalent\n\
> + an absent option argument means 'descriptor'\n\
Fair enough. My thinking was for patches like these I'd like to minimize the
number
of commits, whilst in this case I assumed the change wouldn't be controversial.
I'll merge this adjustment into to current patch if that's OK with you?
thanks,
Pádraig.
- bug#14976: [patch] use semicolons in option descriptions, not periods, Benno Schulenberg, 2013/08/01
- bug#14976: [patch] use semicolons in option descriptions, not periods, Pádraig Brady, 2013/08/02
- bug#14976: [patch] use semicolons in option descriptions, not periods, Benno Schulenberg, 2013/08/03
- bug#14976: [patch] use semicolons in option descriptions, not periods, Pádraig Brady, 2013/08/03
- bug#14976: [patch] use semicolons in option descriptions, not periods, Benno Schulenberg, 2013/08/04
- bug#14976: [patch] use semicolons in option descriptions, not periods,
Pádraig Brady <=
- bug#14976: [patch] use semicolons in option descriptions, not periods, Pádraig Brady, 2013/08/04
- bug#14976: [patch] use semicolons in option descriptions, not periods, Bernhard Voelker, 2013/08/04
- bug#14976: [patch] use semicolons in option descriptions, not periods, Benno Schulenberg, 2013/08/04
- bug#14976: [patch] use semicolons in option descriptions, not periods, Pádraig Brady, 2013/08/04
- bug#14976: [patch] use semicolons in option descriptions, not periods, Benno Schulenberg, 2013/08/04
- bug#14976: [patch] use semicolons in option descriptions, not periods, Pádraig Brady, 2013/08/04