Re: [PATCH] format-patch: allow a non-integral version numbers

[Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>]

Đoàn Trần Công Danh  <congdanhqx@gmail.com> writes:

>> If we were to do this, I would probably suggest a preliminary patch
>> that refactors the hardcoded "reroll_count - 1" out of diff_title()
>> so that the helper takes two "reroll count strings", i.e. reroll
>> count for this round, and the previous round, as two separate
>> parameters.  Teach the caller to pass "reroll_count - 1" for the new
>> parameter in this preliminary step.
>
> However, if it's only a minor correction to the major version,
> I _think_ it makes better sense to compare with the major version
> instead of comparing with another minor version.

I wanted to have no opinion on this, as what is expected out of the
fractional iteration count by people would be different depending on
whom you ask.  The "-1" suggestion was a fallback to allow those who
supply integral reroll count not to explicitly say what the previous
round was from the command line.  I do not particularly care how the
previous round for fractional iteration count were computed by default
when the user did not give one explicitly from the command line.

> When a reviewer reviews v3.5, they can just compare to v3.
> In a hypothetical world, when another reviewer jump in and a major
> change required, v4 reroll also compare with v3.
>
> In other words, we will have something likes:
>
>  - v3   vs v2
>  - v3.1 vs v3
>  - v3.2 vs v3
>  ....
>  - v4   vs v3
>
> The good side of this approach is: the logic to choose previous
> version is simple.
>
> The downside of this approach is: reviewers need to re-read the
> changes in v3.1 v3.2, etc... However, we can reasonably expect those
> changes are small enough, they're minor changes after all.
>
> And they will need to re-read all the change if the major verison was
> increased.