From: Phillip Wood <phillip.wood123@gmail.com>
To: kristofferhaugsbakk@fastmail.com, git@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Kristoffer Haugsbakk <code@khaugsbakk.name>,
Matthias Beyer <mail@beyermatthias.de>,
Christoph Anton Mitterer <calestyo@scientia.org>,
Matheus Tavares <matheus.tavb@gmail.com>,
Chris Packham <judge.packham@gmail.com>,
Jakob Haufe <sur5r@sur5r.net>,
Phillip Wood <phillip.wood@dunelm.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] doc: add caveat about roundtripping format-patch
Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2026 11:02:27 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <45be48a0-a656-4f1c-8613-6486e7ad3c40@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <V2_format-patch_caveats.34b@msgid.xyz>
Hi Kristoffer
This looks good to me modulo the comments about "Github MarkDown" I
mentioned in my other mail.
Thanks for working on this, it is a nice improvement to our documentation.
Phillip
On 09/02/2026 22:37, kristofferhaugsbakk@fastmail.com wrote:
> From: Kristoffer Haugsbakk <code@khaugsbakk.name>
>
> git-format-patch(1) and git-am(1) deal with formatting commits as
> patches and applying them, respectively. Naturally they use a few
> delimiters to mark where the commit message ends. This can lead to
> surprising behavior when these delimiters are used in the commit
> message itself.
>
> git-format-patch(1) will accept any commit message and not warn or error
> about these delimiters being used.[1]
>
> Especially problematic is the presence of unindented diffs in the commit
> message; the patch machinery will naturally (since the commit message
> has ended) try to apply that diff and everything after it.[2]
>
> It is unclear whether any commands in this chain will learn to warn
> about this. One concern could be that users have learned to rely on
> the three-dash line rule to conveniently add extra-commit message
> information in the commit message, knowing that git-am(1) will
> ignore it.[4]
>
> All of this is covered already, technically. However, we should spell
> out the implications.
>
> † 1: There is also git-commit(1) to consider. However, making that
> command warn or error out over such delimiters would be disruptive
> to all Git users who never use email in their workflow.
> † 2: Recently patch(1) caused this issue for a project, but it was noted
> that git-am(1) has the same behavior[3]
> † 3: https://github.com/i3/i3/pull/6564#issuecomment-3858381425
> † 4: https://lore.kernel.org/git/xmqqldh4b5y2.fsf@gitster.g/
> https://lore.kernel.org/git/V2_format-patch_caveats.34b@msgid.xyz/
>
> Reported-by: Matthias Beyer <mail@beyermatthias.de>
> Reported-by: Christoph Anton Mitterer <calestyo@scientia.org>
> Reported-by: Matheus Tavares <matheus.tavb@gmail.com>
> Reported-by: Chris Packham <judge.packham@gmail.com>
> Helped-by: Jakob Haufe <sur5r@sur5r.net>
> Signed-off-by: Kristoffer Haugsbakk <code@khaugsbakk.name>
>
> ---
>
> v2:
>
> Address feedback from Phillip Wood.
>
> Cc: Phillip Wood <phillip.wood@dunelm.org.uk>
>
> • Drop the code blocks with the diffs; the prose speaks for itself, no need
> to take up space
> • Don’t discuss git-send-email(1). We already know that git-format-patch(1)
> is the generator. It is mentioned in git-send-email(1).
> • Try to be more clear about the case where someone might be applying a
> diff. Use the example from Matthias Beyer in:
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/git/gfxpnecn2cdtmeiape2d4x5aybuyyqi4c7m6te3khgct34dd44@wqusigna2nsp/
>
> Hopefully I explained it correctly?
> • Add a “this goes to show...”... which seems to emphasize the point
> without being redundant. Hopefully.
>
> Try to address feedback from Junio C Hamano by adding more nuance: the diff
> in the commit message might be applied as well, or the patch machinery
> might trip on something and fail.
>
> Finally, in the middle of discussing the three possible cmt. message
> delimiters, I noticed that the three points were drifting apart. So I
> decided to use the list already used in git-am(1) and be done with it in
> one place.
>
> ---
>
> It seems that the section break in git-format-patch(1) does not get
> applied in the man output (according to `Documentation/doc-diff`
> apparently)? Maybe this is the wrong construct? I couldn’t find any
> other thematic breaks here (though there are several variations).
> ---
> Documentation/format-patch-caveats.adoc | 36 +++++++++++++++++++
> .../format-patch-end-of-commit-message.adoc | 3 ++
> Documentation/git-am.adoc | 15 ++++++--
> Documentation/git-format-patch.adoc | 4 +++
> Documentation/git-send-email.adoc | 5 +++
> 5 files changed, 60 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> create mode 100644 Documentation/format-patch-caveats.adoc
> create mode 100644 Documentation/format-patch-end-of-commit-message.adoc
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/format-patch-caveats.adoc b/Documentation/format-patch-caveats.adoc
> new file mode 100644
> index 00000000000..c666d709742
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/Documentation/format-patch-caveats.adoc
> @@ -0,0 +1,36 @@
> +Patches produced by linkgit:git-format-patch[1] are inline. This means
> +that the output from that command can lead to a different commit message
> +when applied with linkgit:git-am[1]. It can also mean that the patch
> +that is applied is not the same as the one that was generated, or that
> +the patch application fails outright.
> +ifdef::git-am[]
> +See the <<discussion,DISCUSSION>> section above for the syntactic rules.
> +endif::git-am[]
> +
> +ifndef::git-am[]
> +Any line that is of the form:
> +
> +include::format-patch-end-of-commit-message.adoc[]
> +
> +will terminate the commit message and cause the patch machinery to start
> +searching for patches to apply.
> +endif::git-am[]
> +
> +Note that this is especially problematic for unindented diffs that occur
> +in the commit message; the diff in the commit message might get applied
> +along with the patch section, or the patch application machinery might
> +trip up because the patch target doesn't apply. This could for example
> +be caused by a diff in a GitHub Markdown code block.
> +
> +This loss of fidelity might be simple to notice if you are applying
> +patches directly from a mailbox. However, changes originating from Git
> +could be applied in bulk, in which case this would be much harder to
> +notice. This could for example be a Linux distribution which uses patch
> +files to apply changes on top of the commits from the upstream
> +repositories. This goes to show that this behavior does not only impact
> +email workflows.
> +
> +Given these limitations, one might be tempted to use a general-purpose
> +utility like patch(1) instead. However, patch(1) will not only look for
> +unindented diffs (like linkgit:git-am[1]) but will try to apply indented
> +diffs as well.
> diff --git a/Documentation/format-patch-end-of-commit-message.adoc b/Documentation/format-patch-end-of-commit-message.adoc
> new file mode 100644
> index 00000000000..47399ae7266
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/Documentation/format-patch-end-of-commit-message.adoc
> @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
> +* three-dashes and end-of-line, or
> +* a line that begins with "diff -", or
> +* a line that begins with "Index: "
> diff --git a/Documentation/git-am.adoc b/Documentation/git-am.adoc
> index 0c94776e296..756dfd722b9 100644
> --- a/Documentation/git-am.adoc
> +++ b/Documentation/git-am.adoc
> @@ -231,10 +231,11 @@ applying.
> --allow-empty::
> After a patch failure on an input e-mail message lacking a patch,
> create an empty commit with the contents of the e-mail message
> as its log message.
>
> +[[discussion]]
> DISCUSSION
> ----------
>
> The commit author name is taken from the "From: " line of the
> message, and commit author date is taken from the "Date: " line
> @@ -252,17 +253,18 @@ where the patch begins. Excess whitespace at the end of each
> line is automatically stripped.
>
> The patch is expected to be inline, directly following the
> message. Any line that is of the form:
>
> -* three-dashes and end-of-line, or
> -* a line that begins with "diff -", or
> -* a line that begins with "Index: "
> +include::format-patch-end-of-commit-message.adoc[]
>
> is taken as the beginning of a patch, and the commit log message
> is terminated before the first occurrence of such a line.
>
> +This means that the contents of the commit message can inadvertently
> +interrupt the processing (see the <<caveats,CAVEATS>> section below).
> +
> When initially invoking `git am`, you give it the names of the mailboxes
> to process. Upon seeing the first patch that does not apply, it
> aborts in the middle. You can recover from this in one of two ways:
>
> . skip the current patch by re-running the command with the `--skip`
> @@ -281,10 +283,17 @@ Before any patches are applied, ORIG_HEAD is set to the tip of the
> current branch. This is useful if you have problems with multiple
> commits, like running 'git am' on the wrong branch or an error in the
> commits that is more easily fixed by changing the mailbox (e.g.
> errors in the "From:" lines).
>
> +[[caveats]]
> +CAVEATS
> +-------
> +
> +:git-am: 1
> +include::format-patch-caveats.adoc[]
> +
> HOOKS
> -----
> This command can run `applypatch-msg`, `pre-applypatch`,
> and `post-applypatch` hooks. See linkgit:githooks[5] for more
> information.
> diff --git a/Documentation/git-format-patch.adoc b/Documentation/git-format-patch.adoc
> index 9a7807ca71a..36851aaf5e1 100644
> --- a/Documentation/git-format-patch.adoc
> +++ b/Documentation/git-format-patch.adoc
> @@ -796,10 +796,14 @@ CAVEATS
> Note that `format-patch` will omit merge commits from the output, even
> if they are part of the requested range. A simple "patch" does not
> include enough information for the receiving end to reproduce the same
> merge commit.
>
> +'''
> +
> +include::format-patch-caveats.adoc[]
> +
> SEE ALSO
> --------
> linkgit:git-am[1], linkgit:git-send-email[1]
>
> GIT
> diff --git a/Documentation/git-send-email.adoc b/Documentation/git-send-email.adoc
> index ebe8853e9f5..0b118df6498 100644
> --- a/Documentation/git-send-email.adoc
> +++ b/Documentation/git-send-email.adoc
> @@ -690,10 +690,15 @@ Links of a few such community maintained helpers are:
> (cross platform client that can send emails using the ProtonMail API)
>
> - https://github.com/AdityaGarg8/git-credential-email[git-msgraph]
> (cross platform client that can send emails using the Microsoft Graph API)
>
> +CAVEATS
> +-------
> +
> +include::format-patch-caveats.adoc[]
> +
> SEE ALSO
> --------
> linkgit:git-format-patch[1], linkgit:git-imap-send[1], mbox(5)
>
> GIT
>
> Interdiff against v1:
> diff --git a/Documentation/format-patch-caveats.adoc b/Documentation/format-patch-caveats.adoc
> index 2accf2763fd..c666d709742 100644
> --- a/Documentation/format-patch-caveats.adoc
> +++ b/Documentation/format-patch-caveats.adoc
> @@ -1,39 +1,36 @@
> -Patches produced by linkgit:git-format-patch[1] or
> -linkgit:git-send-email[1] are inline. This means that the output of
> -these two commands can lead to a different commit message when applied
> -with linkgit:git-am[1]. It can also mean that the patch is not applied
> -correctly.
> +Patches produced by linkgit:git-format-patch[1] are inline. This means
> +that the output from that command can lead to a different commit message
> +when applied with linkgit:git-am[1]. It can also mean that the patch
> +that is applied is not the same as the one that was generated, or that
> +the patch application fails outright.
> +ifdef::git-am[]
> +See the <<discussion,DISCUSSION>> section above for the syntactic rules.
> +endif::git-am[]
>
> -The commit message might contain a three-dash line (`---`) which was
> -perhaps meant to be a thematic break. That means that the commit message
> -will be cut short. The presence of a line starting with "Index: " can
> -cause the patch not to be found, giving an error about an empty patch.
> +ifndef::git-am[]
> +Any line that is of the form:
>
> -Furthermore, the presence of an unindented diff in the commit message
> -will not only cut the message short but cause that very diff to be
> -applied, along with the patch in the patch section. The commit message
> -might for example have a diff in a GitHub MarkDown code fence:
> +include::format-patch-end-of-commit-message.adoc[]
>
> -----
> -```
> -diff ...
> -```
> -----
> +will terminate the commit message and cause the patch machinery to start
> +searching for patches to apply.
> +endif::git-am[]
>
> -The solution for this is to indent the diff instead:
> -
> -----
> - diff ...
> -----
> +Note that this is especially problematic for unindented diffs that occur
> +in the commit message; the diff in the commit message might get applied
> +along with the patch section, or the patch application machinery might
> +trip up because the patch target doesn't apply. This could for example
> +be caused by a diff in a GitHub Markdown code block.
>
> This loss of fidelity might be simple to notice if you are applying
> -patches directly from a mailbox. However, a commit authored long ago
> -might be applied in a different context, perhaps because many changes
> -are being integrated via patch files and the
> -linkgit:git-format-patch[1] format is trusted to import changes of a
> -Git origin.
> +patches directly from a mailbox. However, changes originating from Git
> +could be applied in bulk, in which case this would be much harder to
> +notice. This could for example be a Linux distribution which uses patch
> +files to apply changes on top of the commits from the upstream
> +repositories. This goes to show that this behavior does not only impact
> +email workflows.
>
> -One might want to use a general-purpose utility like patch(1) instead,
> -given these limitations. However, patch(1) will not only look for
> +Given these limitations, one might be tempted to use a general-purpose
> +utility like patch(1) instead. However, patch(1) will not only look for
> unindented diffs (like linkgit:git-am[1]) but will try to apply indented
> diffs as well.
> diff --git a/Documentation/format-patch-end-of-commit-message.adoc b/Documentation/format-patch-end-of-commit-message.adoc
> new file mode 100644
> index 00000000000..47399ae7266
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/Documentation/format-patch-end-of-commit-message.adoc
> @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
> +* three-dashes and end-of-line, or
> +* a line that begins with "diff -", or
> +* a line that begins with "Index: "
> diff --git a/Documentation/git-am.adoc b/Documentation/git-am.adoc
> index 18f5b950825..756dfd722b9 100644
> --- a/Documentation/git-am.adoc
> +++ b/Documentation/git-am.adoc
> @@ -231,10 +231,11 @@ applying.
> --allow-empty::
> After a patch failure on an input e-mail message lacking a patch,
> create an empty commit with the contents of the e-mail message
> as its log message.
>
> +[[discussion]]
> DISCUSSION
> ----------
>
> The commit author name is taken from the "From: " line of the
> message, and commit author date is taken from the "Date: " line
> @@ -252,18 +253,16 @@ where the patch begins. Excess whitespace at the end of each
> line is automatically stripped.
>
> The patch is expected to be inline, directly following the
> message. Any line that is of the form:
>
> -* three-dashes and end-of-line, or
> -* a line that begins with "diff -", or
> -* a line that begins with "Index: "
> +include::format-patch-end-of-commit-message.adoc[]
>
> is taken as the beginning of a patch, and the commit log message
> is terminated before the first occurrence of such a line.
>
> -This means that the content of the commit message can inadverently
> +This means that the contents of the commit message can inadvertently
> interrupt the processing (see the <<caveats,CAVEATS>> section below).
>
> When initially invoking `git am`, you give it the names of the mailboxes
> to process. Upon seeing the first patch that does not apply, it
> aborts in the middle. You can recover from this in one of two ways:
> @@ -288,10 +287,11 @@ errors in the "From:" lines).
>
> [[caveats]]
> CAVEATS
> -------
>
> +:git-am: 1
> include::format-patch-caveats.adoc[]
>
> HOOKS
> -----
> This command can run `applypatch-msg`, `pre-applypatch`,
>
> Range-diff against v1:
> 1: 4bed8f55b98 ! 1: c54f394bb33 doc: add caveat about roundtripping format-patch
> @@ Metadata
> ## Commit message ##
> doc: add caveat about roundtripping format-patch
>
> - git-format-patch(1), git-send-email(1), and git-am(1) deal with
> - formatting commits as patches, sending them (perhaps directly), and
> - applying them, respectively. Naturally they use a few delimiters to mark
> - where the commit message ends. This can lead to surprising behavior when
> - these delimiters are used in the commit message itself.
> + git-format-patch(1) and git-am(1) deal with formatting commits as
> + patches and applying them, respectively. Naturally they use a few
> + delimiters to mark where the commit message ends. This can lead to
> + surprising behavior when these delimiters are used in the commit
> + message itself.
>
> - git-format-patch(1) and git-send-email(1) will accept any commit message
> - and not warn or error about these delimiters being used.[1]
> + git-format-patch(1) will accept any commit message and not warn or error
> + about these delimiters being used.[1]
>
> - Moreover, the presence of unindented diffs in the commit message will
> - cause git-am(1) to apply both the diffs from the commit message as well
> - as the patch section.[2]
> + Especially problematic is the presence of unindented diffs in the commit
> + message; the patch machinery will naturally (since the commit message
> + has ended) try to apply that diff and everything after it.[2]
>
> It is unclear whether any commands in this chain will learn to warn
> about this. One concern could be that users have learned to rely on
> @@ Commit message
> information in the commit message, knowing that git-am(1) will
> ignore it.[4]
>
> - All of this is covered already, technically, However, we should spell
> + All of this is covered already, technically. However, we should spell
> out the implications.
>
> † 1: There is also git-commit(1) to consider. However, making that
> command warn or error out over such delimiters would be disruptive
> to all Git users who never use email in their workflow.
> - [2]: Recently patch(1) caused this issue for a project, but it was noted
> + † 2: Recently patch(1) caused this issue for a project, but it was noted
> that git-am(1) has the same behavior[3]
> - [3]: https://github.com/i3/i3/pull/6564#issuecomment-3858381425
> - [4]: https://lore.kernel.org/git/xmqqldh4b5y2.fsf@gitster.g/
> + † 3: https://github.com/i3/i3/pull/6564#issuecomment-3858381425
> + † 4: https://lore.kernel.org/git/xmqqldh4b5y2.fsf@gitster.g/
> + https://lore.kernel.org/git/V2_format-patch_caveats.34b@msgid.xyz/
>
> Reported-by: Matthias Beyer <mail@beyermatthias.de>
> Reported-by: Christoph Anton Mitterer <calestyo@scientia.org>
> @@ Commit message
> Helped-by: Jakob Haufe <sur5r@sur5r.net>
> Signed-off-by: Kristoffer Haugsbakk <code@khaugsbakk.name>
>
> + ---
> +
> + v2:
> +
> + Address feedback from Phillip Wood.
> +
> + Cc: Phillip Wood <phillip.wood@dunelm.org.uk>
> +
> + • Drop the code blocks with the diffs; the prose speaks for itself, no need
> + to take up space
> + • Don’t discuss git-send-email(1). We already know that git-format-patch(1)
> + is the generator. It is mentioned in git-send-email(1).
> + • Try to be more clear about the case where someone might be applying a
> + diff. Use the example from Matthias Beyer in:
> +
> + https://lore.kernel.org/git/gfxpnecn2cdtmeiape2d4x5aybuyyqi4c7m6te3khgct34dd44@wqusigna2nsp/
> +
> + Hopefully I explained it correctly?
> + • Add a “this goes to show...”... which seems to emphasize the point
> + without being redundant. Hopefully.
> +
> + Try to address feedback from Junio C Hamano by adding more nuance: the diff
> + in the commit message might be applied as well, or the patch machinery
> + might trip on something and fail.
> +
> + Finally, in the middle of discussing the three possible cmt. message
> + delimiters, I noticed that the three points were drifting apart. So I
> + decided to use the list already used in git-am(1) and be done with it in
> + one place.
> +
> + ---
> +
> + It seems that the section break in git-format-patch(1) does not get
> + applied in the man output (according to `Documentation/doc-diff`
> + apparently)? Maybe this is the wrong construct? I couldn’t find any
> + other thematic breaks here (though there are several variations).
> +
> ## Documentation/format-patch-caveats.adoc (new) ##
> @@
> -+Patches produced by linkgit:git-format-patch[1] or
> -+linkgit:git-send-email[1] are inline. This means that the output of
> -+these two commands can lead to a different commit message when applied
> -+with linkgit:git-am[1]. It can also mean that the patch is not applied
> -+correctly.
> -+
> -+The commit message might contain a three-dash line (`---`) which was
> -+perhaps meant to be a thematic break. That means that the commit message
> -+will be cut short. The presence of a line starting with "Index: " can
> -+cause the patch not to be found, giving an error about an empty patch.
> ++Patches produced by linkgit:git-format-patch[1] are inline. This means
> ++that the output from that command can lead to a different commit message
> ++when applied with linkgit:git-am[1]. It can also mean that the patch
> ++that is applied is not the same as the one that was generated, or that
> ++the patch application fails outright.
> ++ifdef::git-am[]
> ++See the <<discussion,DISCUSSION>> section above for the syntactic rules.
> ++endif::git-am[]
> +
> -+Furthermore, the presence of an unindented diff in the commit message
> -+will not only cut the message short but cause that very diff to be
> -+applied, along with the patch in the patch section. The commit message
> -+might for example have a diff in a GitHub MarkDown code fence:
> ++ifndef::git-am[]
> ++Any line that is of the form:
> +
> -+----
> -+```
> -+diff ...
> -+```
> -+----
> ++include::format-patch-end-of-commit-message.adoc[]
> +
> -+The solution for this is to indent the diff instead:
> ++will terminate the commit message and cause the patch machinery to start
> ++searching for patches to apply.
> ++endif::git-am[]
> +
> -+----
> -+ diff ...
> -+----
> ++Note that this is especially problematic for unindented diffs that occur
> ++in the commit message; the diff in the commit message might get applied
> ++along with the patch section, or the patch application machinery might
> ++trip up because the patch target doesn't apply. This could for example
> ++be caused by a diff in a GitHub Markdown code block.
> +
> +This loss of fidelity might be simple to notice if you are applying
> -+patches directly from a mailbox. However, a commit authored long ago
> -+might be applied in a different context, perhaps because many changes
> -+are being integrated via patch files and the
> -+linkgit:git-format-patch[1] format is trusted to import changes of a
> -+Git origin.
> ++patches directly from a mailbox. However, changes originating from Git
> ++could be applied in bulk, in which case this would be much harder to
> ++notice. This could for example be a Linux distribution which uses patch
> ++files to apply changes on top of the commits from the upstream
> ++repositories. This goes to show that this behavior does not only impact
> ++email workflows.
> +
> -+One might want to use a general-purpose utility like patch(1) instead,
> -+given these limitations. However, patch(1) will not only look for
> ++Given these limitations, one might be tempted to use a general-purpose
> ++utility like patch(1) instead. However, patch(1) will not only look for
> +unindented diffs (like linkgit:git-am[1]) but will try to apply indented
> +diffs as well.
>
> + ## Documentation/format-patch-end-of-commit-message.adoc (new) ##
> +@@
> ++* three-dashes and end-of-line, or
> ++* a line that begins with "diff -", or
> ++* a line that begins with "Index: "
> +
> ## Documentation/git-am.adoc ##
> -@@ Documentation/git-am.adoc: message. Any line that is of the form:
> +@@ Documentation/git-am.adoc: applying.
> + create an empty commit with the contents of the e-mail message
> + as its log message.
> +
> ++[[discussion]]
> + DISCUSSION
> + ----------
> +
> +@@ Documentation/git-am.adoc: line is automatically stripped.
> + The patch is expected to be inline, directly following the
> + message. Any line that is of the form:
> +
> +-* three-dashes and end-of-line, or
> +-* a line that begins with "diff -", or
> +-* a line that begins with "Index: "
> ++include::format-patch-end-of-commit-message.adoc[]
> +
> is taken as the beginning of a patch, and the commit log message
> is terminated before the first occurrence of such a line.
>
> -+This means that the content of the commit message can inadverently
> ++This means that the contents of the commit message can inadvertently
> +interrupt the processing (see the <<caveats,CAVEATS>> section below).
> +
> When initially invoking `git am`, you give it the names of the mailboxes
> @@ Documentation/git-am.adoc: commits, like running 'git am' on the wrong branch or
> +CAVEATS
> +-------
> +
> ++:git-am: 1
> +include::format-patch-caveats.adoc[]
> +
> HOOKS
>
> base-commit: 3e0db84c88c57e70ac8be8c196dfa92c5d656fbc
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-02-10 11:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 65+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-02-06 7:43 git-am applies commit message diffs Matthias Beyer
2026-02-06 8:04 ` Jacob Keller
2026-02-06 8:18 ` Matthias Beyer
2026-02-06 9:03 ` Jeff King
2026-02-07 14:57 ` [PATCH 0/3] commit-msg.sample: reject messages that would confuse "git am" Phillip Wood
2026-02-07 14:58 ` [PATCH 1/3] templates: add .gitattributes entry for sample hooks Phillip Wood
2026-02-07 14:58 ` [PATCH 2/3] templates: detect commit messages containing diffs Phillip Wood
2026-02-07 14:58 ` [PATCH 3/3] templates: detect messages that contain a separator line Phillip Wood
2026-02-07 21:27 ` Junio C Hamano
2026-02-07 21:38 ` Kristoffer Haugsbakk
2026-02-09 0:17 ` Junio C Hamano
2026-02-09 7:00 ` Jeff King
2026-02-09 10:42 ` Phillip Wood
2026-02-10 6:44 ` Jeff King
2026-02-09 6:57 ` [PATCH 0/3] commit-msg.sample: reject messages that would confuse "git am" Jeff King
2026-02-09 10:43 ` Phillip Wood
2026-02-09 11:07 ` Matthias Beyer
2026-02-10 6:46 ` Jeff King
2026-02-09 15:58 ` git-am applies commit message diffs Patrick Steinhardt
2026-02-10 2:16 ` Jacob Keller
2026-02-10 14:22 ` Patrick Steinhardt
2026-02-10 15:47 ` Junio C Hamano
2026-02-11 2:31 ` Jacob Keller
2026-02-11 2:34 ` Jacob Keller
2026-02-11 7:47 ` Jeff King
2026-02-11 15:23 ` Kristoffer Haugsbakk
2026-02-11 15:47 ` Junio C Hamano
2026-02-10 6:56 ` Jeff King
2026-02-13 14:34 ` [PATCH v2 0/2] commit-msg.sample: reject messages that would confuse "git am" Phillip Wood
2026-02-13 14:34 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] templates: add .gitattributes entry for sample hooks Phillip Wood
2026-02-13 14:34 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] templates: detect commit messages containing diffs Phillip Wood
2026-02-13 16:42 ` Kristoffer Haugsbakk
2026-02-13 18:08 ` Junio C Hamano
2026-02-14 14:46 ` Phillip Wood
2026-02-13 17:59 ` Junio C Hamano
2026-02-14 14:36 ` Phillip Wood
2026-02-14 15:42 ` Junio C Hamano
2026-02-13 17:41 ` [PATCH v2 0/2] commit-msg.sample: reject messages that would confuse "git am" Junio C Hamano
2026-02-06 8:59 ` git-am applies commit message diffs Florian Weimer
2026-02-06 9:24 ` Jeff King
2026-02-06 9:48 ` Florian Weimer
2026-02-06 10:08 ` Jeff King
2026-02-06 8:43 ` Kristoffer Haugsbakk
2026-02-06 17:45 ` Jakob Haufe
2026-02-07 10:08 ` Kristoffer Haugsbakk
2026-02-07 21:44 ` Kristoffer Haugsbakk
2026-02-08 0:11 ` [PATCH] doc: add caveat about roundtripping format-patch kristofferhaugsbakk
2026-02-08 1:39 ` Junio C Hamano
2026-02-08 17:18 ` Kristoffer Haugsbakk
2026-02-09 16:42 ` Phillip Wood
2026-02-09 17:59 ` Kristoffer Haugsbakk
2026-02-10 10:57 ` Phillip Wood
2026-02-10 16:00 ` Kristoffer Haugsbakk
2026-02-09 22:37 ` [PATCH v2] " kristofferhaugsbakk
2026-02-09 22:59 ` Junio C Hamano
2026-02-09 23:11 ` Kristoffer Haugsbakk
2026-02-10 11:02 ` Phillip Wood [this message]
2026-02-10 18:20 ` Kristoffer Haugsbakk
2026-02-12 22:28 ` [PATCH v3] doc: add caveat about round-tripping format-patch kristofferhaugsbakk
2026-02-12 23:19 ` Junio C Hamano
2026-02-13 14:41 ` Phillip Wood
2026-02-13 14:43 ` Kristoffer Haugsbakk
2026-02-13 18:02 ` Junio C Hamano
2026-02-10 0:53 ` [PATCH] doc: add caveat about roundtripping format-patch Christoph Anton Mitterer
2026-02-10 16:00 ` Kristoffer Haugsbakk
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=45be48a0-a656-4f1c-8613-6486e7ad3c40@gmail.com \
--to=phillip.wood123@gmail.com \
--cc=calestyo@scientia.org \
--cc=code@khaugsbakk.name \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=judge.packham@gmail.com \
--cc=kristofferhaugsbakk@fastmail.com \
--cc=mail@beyermatthias.de \
--cc=matheus.tavb@gmail.com \
--cc=phillip.wood@dunelm.org.uk \
--cc=sur5r@sur5r.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox