Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> Karthik Nayak <karthik.188@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
>> Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>
>>> Karthik Nayak <karthik.188@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>>
>>>>> - OPT_STRING( 0 , "start-after", &filter.start_after, N_("start-after"), N_("start iteration after the provided marker")),
>>>>> + OPT_STRING( 0 , "start-after", &filter.start_after, N_("marker"), N_("start iteration after the provided marker")),
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Ah! I did fix a typo here, but your fix is better. Thanks.
>>>
>>> Here where? Is that "fix a typo" something I should go around and
>>> make sure I do not miss?
>>
>> I meant my earlier patch fa0f4e46f5 (for-each-ref: reword the
>> documentation for '--start-after', 2025-07-28) which is merged to master
>> now.
>
> Hmph, so what does mentioning of your earlier typofix add to review
> of this new patch? We should revert your earlier change and replace
> it with this one? Or there were two typos, you fixed only one, and
> this patch ties a loose end left by it (but then that is not what
> I'd describe "yours is better", so I am still puzzled)?
>
I was referring to the fact that I made the change from "start-start" to
"start-after", but "marker" would've been the better replacement, so my
review was concluding that while I was here and made a change it still
was lacking.
"yours is better" is poor choice of words.
> Thanks.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
