From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: git-format-patch patch Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2008 00:42:43 -0800 Message-ID: <7vzlitho1o.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <877i5yy149.fsf@jidanni.org> <20081218083515.GB29356@coredump.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: jidanni@jidanni.org, git@vger.kernel.org To: Jeff King X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Dec 18 09:44:12 2008 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 1LDEUM-0004Px-O4 for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Thu, 18 Dec 2008 09:44:11 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751364AbYLRImv (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Dec 2008 03:42:51 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751328AbYLRImv (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Dec 2008 03:42:51 -0500 Received: from a-sasl-fastnet.sasl.smtp.pobox.com ([207.106.133.19]:53408 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751128AbYLRImu (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Dec 2008 03:42:50 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-sasl-fastnet.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 980F988541; Thu, 18 Dec 2008 03:42:49 -0500 (EST) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [68.225.240.211]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by a-sasl-fastnet.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id AAB0F88540; Thu, 18 Dec 2008 03:42:45 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <20081218083515.GB29356@coredump.intra.peff.net> (Jeff King's message of "Thu, 18 Dec 2008 03:35:15 -0500") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: D9E01B08-CCDF-11DD-9262-5720C92D7133-77302942!a-sasl-fastnet.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Jeff King writes: > ... Besides the format not being applicable by regular git tools: > > - there is no commit message describing the changes, nor the reasoning > behind them > > - it was not sent to the maintainer (who does read the list, but does > not always read every message). Actually, it would probably be a good idea not to send your first patch to me and instead to request for comments from the list ;-)n The worst offence of the message was the choice of bad Subject that strongly encouraged anyone to skip it. Consider: Subject: [PATCH] document "format-patch --in-reply-to" better or something like that.