From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com (pb-smtp1.pobox.com [64.147.108.70]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BEEB7E567 for ; Wed, 5 Jun 2024 21:52:24 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=64.147.108.70 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1717624346; cv=none; b=FV1vtIcV7+g3t5foIizUA94FYIaEv82LwxRvWP5jObV/Jk9RCGraHWceOyNp0nnSPPxY0NPvMlnWh3i/pjq8JDX/JP9/CcK7E8eW+e2/VnKxHdkNTj/A8UX0Mf8WNmrtuEdmqbUBTwGuhW/BJ9xjw2xUW00Eg4WN9weLnytHr1o= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1717624346; c=relaxed/simple; bh=WZOKaqSHbOtdTgRM0WcaMeEZd30mEllHEIrteHC2U8o=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=Faig1SnIFqspsdWJD9n2ZV98J2fOwk2gShKgCN6Scyzo1+YuKXAHgqlMveGSayUJ6eVQg/qluxYo0rnkjitSlW1FETIbeek7onhh8Y7h/qDlZtkvjnV6QAKsIH8j2TrrKJyX3/n35lu28nZveCwCHgnWrlepz5oo7tCCVTMlRZQ= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=pobox.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pobox.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b=TXugz42Z; arc=none smtp.client-ip=64.147.108.70 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=pobox.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pobox.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b="TXugz42Z" Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84DAE27E5F; Wed, 5 Jun 2024 17:52:23 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=sasl; bh=WZOKaqSHbOtd TgRM0WcaMeEZd30mEllHEIrteHC2U8o=; b=TXugz42ZcTjF3odI9lo3g+OAW+Lf uWvpAVVuwmsUipbybfzvlNz9/KVJE8AKZpknWIi+6knby7S6EYCzioKrM61BpCXF OOaAYCoUviXnQP4JxjzzgDK6kZMDFRwzjT0AvFCG2rNsaPJFcI7nee/F+GjxhFXN 1SvhpfYyUBM2Mmw= Received: from pb-smtp1.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7BE1C27E5E; Wed, 5 Jun 2024 17:52:23 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.125.204.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E5B1B27E5D; Wed, 5 Jun 2024 17:52:22 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: =?utf-8?Q?Rub=C3=A9n?= Justo Cc: Git List , Patrick Steinhardt Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] format-patch: assume --cover-letter for diff in multi-patch series In-Reply-To: <5aebe520-e540-46b4-a887-af488fe2663a@gmail.com> (=?utf-8?Q?=22Rub=C3=A9n?= Justo"'s message of "Wed, 5 Jun 2024 23:24:53 +0200") References: <6269eed5-f1ff-43f3-9249-d6a0f1852a6c@gmail.com> <14365d68-ed04-44fe-823b-a3959626684e@gmail.com> <5aebe520-e540-46b4-a887-af488fe2663a@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 05 Jun 2024 14:52:21 -0700 Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 X-Pobox-Relay-ID: E3B3013C-2385-11EF-968C-B84BEB2EC81B-77302942!pb-smtp1.pobox.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Rub=C3=A9n Justo writes: > I'm curious, a test like:=20 > > test_expect_success "format-patch --range-diff, implicit --cover-letter= " ' > test_when_finished "rm v2-000?-*" && > test_must_fail git format-patch --no-cover-letter > -v2 --range-diff=3Dtopic main..unmodified > > isn't it confusing? It is, but what makes it confusing is that the title does not describe what it tests, no? It tests that --no-cover-letter disables implicit cover-letter generation even with the presence of --range-diff. In the context of t3206-range-diff.sh, we know we are talking about the "range-diff", and mention of "cover-letter" is a hint enough that the "format-patch" is involved, so perhaps titles like test_expect_success 'explicit --no-cover-letter defeats implied --cov= er-letter' and test_expect_success '--cover-letter is implied for multi-patch series= ' would be clear enough and convey what the tests are actually doing.