From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jon Loeliger Subject: Re: [PATCH] Rearrange git-format-patch synopsis to improve clarity. Date: Tue, 06 Nov 2007 09:01:22 -0600 Message-ID: <473081C2.7060106@freescale.com> References: <119421522591-git-send-email-dsymonds@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Junio C Hamano , git@vger.kernel.org To: David Symonds X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Nov 06 16:05:04 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1IpPz9-0006gY-AA for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Tue, 06 Nov 2007 16:04:59 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752951AbXKFPEk (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Nov 2007 10:04:40 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752208AbXKFPEk (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Nov 2007 10:04:40 -0500 Received: from az33egw02.freescale.net ([192.88.158.103]:45550 "EHLO az33egw02.freescale.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751991AbXKFPEj (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Nov 2007 10:04:39 -0500 Received: from az33smr02.freescale.net (az33smr02.freescale.net [10.64.34.200]) by az33egw02.freescale.net (8.12.11/az33egw02) with ESMTP id lA6F1ZGY006693; Tue, 6 Nov 2007 08:03:28 -0700 (MST) Received: from [10.214.72.154] (mvp-10-214-72-154.am.freescale.net [10.214.72.154]) by az33smr02.freescale.net (8.13.1/8.13.0) with ESMTP id lA6F1Md6018464; Tue, 6 Nov 2007 09:01:22 -0600 (CST) User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728) In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: David Symonds wrote: > On 11/5/07, David Symonds wrote: >> [-s | --signoff] [] >> - [--start-number ] [--numbered-files] >> + [-n | --numbered-files | -N | --no-numbered] >> + [--start-number ] > > Now that I look at it again, it seems the long options look quite > inconsistent. I think it should be either > --numbered-files/--no-numbered-files or --numbered/--no-numbered. My > preference is with the latter (for brevity), but that breaks > backward-compatibility. > > Would you accept a patch that changed --numbered-files to --numbered, > and kept the former as a synonym? There are two forms of numbered file output names: the traditional "0001-Foo-the-bar" and just "1" styles. Please don't break that. Both are needed. Thanks, jdl