summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/git-gui/lib
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorJunio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>2008-09-05 07:29:51 (GMT)
committerJunio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>2008-09-05 08:15:40 (GMT)
commitf22a432b157c5673a1004934a2e6ba77dd55b356 (patch)
tree5c29b4efa93589e6b9951cde646555baa095cc22 /git-gui/lib
parent7ceacdffc5c05f9a763b4cb6ea7cb528004643c3 (diff)
downloadgit-f22a432b157c5673a1004934a2e6ba77dd55b356.zip
git-f22a432b157c5673a1004934a2e6ba77dd55b356.tar.gz
git-f22a432b157c5673a1004934a2e6ba77dd55b356.tar.bz2
Mention the fact that 'git annotate' is only for backward compatibility.
When somebody is reading git-blame.txt (or git-annotate.txt) for the first time, the message we would like to send is: (1) Here is why you would want to use this command, what it can do (perhaps more than what you would have expected from "$scm blame"), and how you tell it to do what it does. This is obvious. (2) You might have heard of the command with the other name. There is no difference between the two, except they differ in their default output formats. This is essential to answer: "git has both? how are they different?" (3) We tend to encourage blame over annotate for new scripts and new people, but there is no reason to choose one over the other. This is not as important as (2), but would be useful to avoid repeated questions about "when will we start deprecating this?" As long as we describe (2) on git-annotate page clearly enough, people who read git-blame page first and get curious can refer to git-annotate page. While at it, subtly hint (3) without being overly explicit. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Diffstat (limited to 'git-gui/lib')
0 files changed, 0 insertions, 0 deletions