Re: [PATCH 2/2] Document rev^! and rev^@ as revision specifiers

2012-07-23 Thread Junio C Hamano
Max Horn writes: >> > On 06.07.2012, at 21:18, Junio C Hamano wrote: > >> Max Horn writes: >> > +'{caret}!', e.g. 'HEAD{caret}!':: > + A suffix '{caret}' followed by an exclamation mark > + means commit '' but forces all of its parents to be excluded. For > + commands that d

Re: [PATCH 2/2] Document rev^! and rev^@ as revision specifiers

2012-07-09 Thread Max Horn
> On 06.07.2012, at 21:18, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Max Horn writes: > +'{caret}!', e.g. 'HEAD{caret}!':: + A suffix '{caret}' followed by an exclamation mark + means commit '' but forces all of its parents to be excluded. For + commands that deal with a single revision, t

Re: [PATCH 2/2] Document rev^! and rev^@ as revision specifiers

2012-07-06 Thread Junio C Hamano
Max Horn writes: >>> +'{caret}!', e.g. 'HEAD{caret}!':: >>> + A suffix '{caret}' followed by an exclamation mark >>> + means commit '' but forces all of its parents to be excluded. For >>> + commands that deal with a single revision, this is the same as '". >> >> Is this sentence correct? "g