From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCH] fmt-patch: Support --attach Date: Sat, 20 May 2006 11:00:11 -0700 Message-ID: <7vu07k1sr8.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> References: <7v4pzk3831.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 Sat May 20 20:00:41 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FhVkQ-0003OF-JC for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Sat, 20 May 2006 20:00:19 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932353AbWETSAP (ORCPT ); Sat, 20 May 2006 14:00:15 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932352AbWETSAP (ORCPT ); Sat, 20 May 2006 14:00:15 -0400 Received: from fed1rmmtao02.cox.net ([68.230.241.37]:29908 "EHLO fed1rmmtao02.cox.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932350AbWETSAN (ORCPT ); Sat, 20 May 2006 14:00:13 -0400 Received: from assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net ([68.4.9.127]) by fed1rmmtao02.cox.net (InterMail vM.6.01.06.01 201-2131-130-101-20060113) with ESMTP id <20060520180012.BLHX15447.fed1rmmtao02.cox.net@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>; Sat, 20 May 2006 14:00:12 -0400 To: Johannes Schindelin In-Reply-To: (Johannes Schindelin's message of "Sat, 20 May 2006 19:51:26 +0200 (CEST)") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110004 (No Gnus v0.4) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Johannes Schindelin writes: > On Sat, 20 May 2006, Junio C Hamano wrote: > >> Johannes Schindelin writes: > > There are two options missing: --signoff and --check. > > --signoff is my fault: it is probably a good thing to drop it from > format-patch, and only leave it in applymbox. I think that is fine. format-patch only formats existing commits, and if you are signing off something you could already have done that when you made the commits anyway, so that flag was redundant. > As for --check: how about having yet another diff "format": > DIFF_FORMAT_CHECK? Instead of showing the diff, it only shows the line(s) > which are offending. Never thought of that but I think it makes sense. I liked the way Sean did the --summary; I am wondering if we could clean up the --with-* stuff in a similar way. We currently do "if DIFF_FORMAT_XYZ or with_xyz then do this" which is quite honestly disgusting (my fault).