Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> What did you do before the bug happened? (Steps to reproduce your issue)
> git help nosuchcommand
>
> What did you expect to happen? (Expected behavior)
> An error message: "No manual entry for git-nosuchcommand"
>
> What happened instead? (Actual behavior)
> An error message: "No manual entry for gitnosuchcommand"
I am of two minds. When "git help" is asked for commands, your
suggestion does make sense, i.e.
$ git help dog-file
No manual entry for gitdog-file
And these two are moral equivalents.
$ git help cat-file
$ man git-cat-file
But "git help" can ask for things other than subcommands.
For example, these two are equivalents.
$ git help glossary
$ man gitglossary
Notice the lack of "-" there?
> If "nosuchcommand" were a git command, the man page would be
> readable by typing "man git-nosuchcommand". The error message
> should reflect that. (The error message is actually produced
> by the "man" command.)
In other words, if "nosuchguide" were a concept with guide, the man
page is readable by "man gitnosuchguide", and the error message does
reflect it.
Unlike "git foo --help", where it is clear that the user expected a
subommand "foo", when the user says "git help foo", we cannot tell
whether the user asked for documentation for a command or a concept
guide, so adding "-" there is a bit like robbing Peter to pay Paul.
Thanks for a report.
