From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sam Ravnborg Subject: Re: Why do we need [PATCH]? Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2005 22:42:31 +0100 Message-ID: <20051216214231.GA2903@mars.ravnborg.org> References: <20051216210145.GA25311@mars.ravnborg.org> <7vpsnwenqy.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Dec 16 22:43:30 2005 Return-path: Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EnNKb-0004S6-08 for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Fri, 16 Dec 2005 22:41:37 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932486AbVLPVle (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 Dec 2005 16:41:34 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932487AbVLPVle (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 Dec 2005 16:41:34 -0500 Received: from pfepa.post.tele.dk ([195.41.46.235]:14371 "EHLO pfepa.post.tele.dk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932486AbVLPVld (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 Dec 2005 16:41:33 -0500 Received: from mars.ravnborg.org (0x50a0757d.hrnxx9.adsl-dhcp.tele.dk [80.160.117.125]) by pfepa.post.tele.dk (Postfix) with ESMTP id E948747FE77; Fri, 16 Dec 2005 22:41:32 +0100 (CET) Received: by mars.ravnborg.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 487726AC32D; Fri, 16 Dec 2005 22:42:31 +0100 (CET) To: Junio C Hamano Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <7vpsnwenqy.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Fri, Dec 16, 2005 at 01:27:33PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Sam Ravnborg writes: > > > I looked at the source and found the -k option, but adding [PATCH] > > should not be default behaviour so this is not the correct solution. > > The "correct" solution depends on where you come from. That > extra [PATCH] is a carryover from BK days, I was told by Linus, > to make e-mailed things stand out --- I've never used BK but I > am guessing that things were not as obvious as our commit > messages, perhaps? You can a typical bk commit here: http://linus.bkbits.net:8080/linux-2.5/cset@1.2243?nav=index.html|ChangeSet@-9M And here it made much more sense sine the author/comitter info are less structured. Also we do nto have the Signed-off-by: stuff back then. > We have "Author/Committer" distinction so > the [PATCH] marker is redundant. > > The rewrite, "git-am" does not bother with adding [PATCH], but > the original "git-applymbox", being everyday Linus' tool, was > left as it was, not to disrupt the workflow of Linus. Thanks, I had forgotten the git-am rewrite. I will use that in the future - if I remember. Sam