Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] doc: move BreakingChanges to a manpage

"Kristoffer Haugsbakk" [off-list ref] writes:

On Wed, Oct 21, 2026, at 18:50, Junio C Hamano wrote:

quoted

"D. Ben Knoble" [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

quoted

Is there any interest in continuing this series?

For myself, I favor making more of Git's documentation accessible to folks.

I do not know about "manual pages", but making this available from
"git help" would be good.  It raises a huge question about what to
do when Git 3.0 comes, though.  Are we going to change every section
and rewrite them to say "we used to do this differently before 3.0"?

See me and Patrick’s subthread: [ref]

You could transform it into a section at the end for “what happened in 3.0” then introduce it with

    These things changed in 3.0. They are written in the future tense
    [?] is reading about what will happen coming from version 2.98 to
    3.0.

Then you wouldn’t need to change any of the rest of the text.

The rewriting effort is not a major concern.  Rather, the question
is whether keeping such a historical document is worth it.  Do you
still care about what the major issues were when we transitioned
from Git 1.x to 2.0, for example?