Re: [PATCH] Documentation: Simplify git-rev-parse's example

Pieter de Bie [off-list ref] writes:

On 19 jun 2008, at 21:33, Junio C Hamano wrote:

quoted

quoted

How is this a vast improvement?

I could see that inverting it top-to-bottom would
be more consistent with gitk or show-branch output.
Your example doesn't have a 3-parent commit, though,
and it isn't _that_ much simpler otherwise...

So this is really better _how_?

Oh, right, of course.  It removes my name.  Got it. :-)

I agree that the patch should have just flipped the tree upside down
without changing the shape of the history the section talks about.

I tried to make it less of a monster while still keeping examples of
all possibilities, which is why I removed two of the nodes.

I do not care _that_ deeply myself, but judging from how often the word
Octopus comes up on this list (even though I do not think we would want to
especially encourage the practice), I think it is a disservice to drop an
octopus from the section that teaches how to name a commit in an ancestry
graph.