From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: Enabling scissors by default? Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2013 12:10:11 -0500 Message-ID: <20130109171011.GB5332@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <50EC92C6.7090509@ubuntu.com> <7vvcb7b8lc.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <50ECAAE2.2020507@ubuntu.com> <7vr4lvb63a.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: Phillip Susi , git@vger.kernel.org To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Jan 09 18:10:42 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1TszAn-0000i1-Hl for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Wed, 09 Jan 2013 18:10:41 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932244Ab3AIRKT (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Jan 2013 12:10:19 -0500 Received: from 75-15-5-89.uvs.iplsin.sbcglobal.net ([75.15.5.89]:50798 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932229Ab3AIRKS (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Jan 2013 12:10:18 -0500 Received: (qmail 30486 invoked by uid 107); 9 Jan 2013 17:11:31 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) (smtp-auth username relayok, mechanism cram-md5) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with ESMTPA; Wed, 09 Jan 2013 12:11:31 -0500 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Wed, 09 Jan 2013 12:10:11 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <7vr4lvb63a.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Tue, Jan 08, 2013 at 03:36:09PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > You could introduce a new configuration variable "am.scissors" and > personally turn it on, though. Setting that variable *does* count > as the user explicitly asking for it. I think we have mailinfo.scissors already. > > I often see patches being tweaked in response to feedback and > > resubmitted, usually with a description of what has changed since the > > previous version. Such descriptions don't need to be in the change > > log when it is finally applied and seem a perfect use of scissors. > > Putting such small logs under "---" line is the accepted practice. Maybe it is just me, but I find the scissors form more readable, because the "cover letter" material often serves to introduce and give context to the patch (e.g., "Thanks for your feedback. I've tried to do X, and it came out well. Here's the patch." serves as an introduction, and logically comes before the commit message itself). That does not say anything one way or another about how dangerous or not it might be to enable scissors by default. Just my two cents that I like the scissors style for patches that come as part of a discussion (and I prefer the "---" style when making comments on the contents of a patch; i.e., when the comments make more sense to be read after reading the commit message to understand what the patch does). -Peff