On Thu, Jun 5, 2008 at 8:42 PM, Wincent Colaiuta <win@wincent.com> wrote:

quoted text
> But if the user types "git help" they'll be presented with the exact same
> list of common commands again, at which point they'll probably wonder why
> Git suggested that.

This is exactly what I meant with my earlier comment.

quoted text
> Funnily enough, if they type "git help help" then they'll get the "git-help"
> man page. So, there is no command called "git-help" on the system, but from
> the user's perspective it walks, talks and quacks like all the "real"
> commands, and so they probably consider it to be one. Whether or not the
> "help" subcommand corresponds to a real executable or script is really just
> an implementation detail, I think.

I fully agree here, it doesn't matter if there is a 'git-help.sh' or
'git-help' executable, as long as from the users POV there is a 'git
help' command should we advertise it.

quoted text
> Having said that, I think your suggestion is sound if it were reworded as:
>
>  See 'man git' and 'git help [command]' for more information.

That would be good, since it does not advertise a git help command,
instead it advertises 'git help command', which clearly -is- a command
(since typing 'git help command' brings up a man page).

-- 
Cheers,

Sverre Rabbelier
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html