summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/Documentation/git-citool.txt
AgeCommit message (Collapse)Author
2011-07-06Documentation: use [verse] for SYNOPSIS sectionsMartin von Zweigbergk
The SYNOPSIS sections of most commands that span several lines already use [verse] to retain line breaks. Most commands that don't span several lines seem not to use [verse]. In the HTML output, [verse] does not only preserve line breaks, but also makes the section indented, which causes a slight inconsistency between commands that use [verse] and those that don't. Use [verse] in all SYNOPSIS sections for consistency. Also remove the blank lines from git-fetch.txt and git-rebase.txt to align with the other man pages. In the case of git-rebase.txt, which already uses [verse], the blank line makes the [verse] not apply to the last line, so removing the blank line also makes the formatting within the document more consistent. While at it, add single quotes to 'git cvsimport' for consistency with other commands. Signed-off-by: Martin von Zweigbergk <martin.von.zweigbergk@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2011-03-11doc: drop author/documentation sections from most pagesJeff King
The point of these sections is generally to: 1. Give credit where it is due. 2. Give the reader an idea of where to ask questions or file bug reports. But they don't do a good job of either case. For (1), they are out of date and incomplete. A much more accurate answer can be gotten through shortlog or blame. For (2), the correct contact point is generally git@vger, and even if you wanted to cc the contact point, the out-of-date and incomplete fields mean you're likely sending to somebody useless. So let's drop the fields entirely from all manpages except git(1) itself. We already point people to the mailing list for bug reports there, and we can update the Authors section to give credit to the major contributors and point to shortlog and blame for more information. Each page has a "This is part of git" footer, so people can follow that to the main git manpage.
2010-01-10Documentation: spell 'git cmd' without dash throughoutThomas Rast
The documentation was quite inconsistent when spelling 'git cmd' if it only refers to the program, not to some specific invocation syntax: both 'git-cmd' and 'git cmd' spellings exist. The current trend goes towards dashless forms, and there is precedent in 647ac70 (git-svn.txt: stop using dash-form of commands., 2009-07-07) to actively eliminate the dashed variants. Replace 'git-cmd' with 'git cmd' throughout, except where git-shell, git-cvsserver, git-upload-pack, git-receive-pack, and git-upload-archive are concerned, because those really live in the $PATH.
2008-07-05manpages: italicize git command names (which were in teletype font)Jonathan Nieder
The names of git commands are not meant to be entered at the commandline; they are just names. So we render them in italics, as is usual for command names in manpages. Using doit () { perl -e 'for (<>) { s/\`(git-[^\`.]*)\`/'\''\1'\''/g; print }' } for i in git*.txt config.txt diff*.txt blame*.txt fetch*.txt i18n.txt \ merge*.txt pretty*.txt pull*.txt rev*.txt urls*.txt do doit <"$i" >"$i+" && mv "$i+" "$i" done git diff . Signed-off-by: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@uchicago.edu> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2008-07-02Documentation formatting and cleanupJonathan Nieder
Following what appears to be the predominant style, format names of commands and commandlines both as `teletype text`. While we're at it, add articles ("a" and "the") in some places, italicize the name of the command in the manual page synopsis line, and add a comma or two where it seems appropriate. Signed-off-by: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@uchicago.edu> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2008-06-06documentation: move git(7) to git(1)Christian Couder
As the "git" man page describes the "git" command at the end-user level, it seems better to move it to man section 1. Signed-off-by: Christian Couder <chriscool@tuxfamily.org> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2008-01-07Documentation: rename gitlink macro to linkgitDan McGee
Between AsciiDoc 8.2.2 and 8.2.3, the following change was made to the stock Asciidoc configuration: @@ -149,7 +153,10 @@ # Inline macros. # Backslash prefix required for escape processing. # (?s) re flag for line spanning. -(?su)[\\]?(?P<name>\w(\w|-)*?):(?P<target>\S*?)(\[(?P<attrlist>.*?)\])= + +# Explicit so they can be nested. +(?su)[\\]?(?P<name>(http|https|ftp|file|mailto|callto|image|link)):(?P<target>\S*?)(\[(?P<attrlist>.*?)\])= + # Anchor: [[[id]]]. Bibliographic anchor. (?su)[\\]?\[\[\[(?P<attrlist>[\w][\w-]*?)\]\]\]=anchor3 # Anchor: [[id,xreflabel]] This default regex now matches explicit values, and unfortunately in this case gitlink was being matched by just 'link', causing the wrong inline macro template to be applied. By renaming the macro, we can avoid being matched by the wrong regex. Signed-off-by: Dan McGee <dpmcgee@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2007-06-23Document git-gui, git-citool as mainporcelain manual pagesShawn O. Pearce
Jakub Narebski pointed out that the git-gui blame viewer is not a widely known feature, but is incredibly useful. Part of the issue is advertising. Up until now we haven't even referenced git-gui from within the core Git manual pages, mostly because I just wasn't sure how I wanted to supply git-gui documentation to end-users, or how that documentation should integrate with the core Git documentation. Based upon Jakub's comment that many users may not even know that the gui is available in a stock Git distribution I'm offering up two basic manual pages: git-citool and git-gui. These should offer enough of a starting point for users to identify that the gui exists, and how to start it. Future releases of git-gui may contain their own documentation system available from within a running git-gui. But not today. Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>