From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 248B9C6FD19 for ; Fri, 10 Mar 2023 09:50:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231266AbjCJJuj (ORCPT ); Fri, 10 Mar 2023 04:50:39 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:50840 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231244AbjCJJuP (ORCPT ); Fri, 10 Mar 2023 04:50:15 -0500 Received: from cloud.peff.net (cloud.peff.net [104.130.231.41]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8E22F1ADD8 for ; Fri, 10 Mar 2023 01:49:51 -0800 (PST) Received: (qmail 19417 invoked by uid 109); 10 Mar 2023 09:49:50 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.2) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with ESMTP; Fri, 10 Mar 2023 09:49:50 +0000 Authentication-Results: cloud.peff.net; auth=none Received: (qmail 10609 invoked by uid 111); 10 Mar 2023 09:49:50 -0000 Received: from coredump.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.2) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with (TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Fri, 10 Mar 2023 04:49:50 -0500 Authentication-Results: peff.net; auth=none Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2023 04:49:49 -0500 From: Jeff King To: Junio C Hamano Cc: Alejandro Colomar , Git Mailing List Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] format-patch: do not respect diff.noprefix Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Mar 09, 2023 at 08:41:29AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Jeff King writes: > > > - if a project really does have a workflow that likes prefix-less > > patches, and the receiver is prepared to use "-p0", then the sender > > now has to manually say "--no-prefix" for each format-patch > > invocation. That doesn't seem _too_ terrible given that the receiver > > has to manually say "-p0" for each git-am invocation. > > It does seem very terrible if any existing projects do use the > workflow, as their receivers need to change their workflow, though. I think the escape hatch there is patch 5, where the sender just sets the new variable to say "no, really, I actually want to send patches without a prefix". I had originally thought to squash them together to help explain that better, but I wasn't 100% sure we'd want format.noprefix. > But we can declare that we do not care about such projects that do > not honor our -p1 worldview, and I have no objection to this change > if we can have list consensus for us to go in that direction. Yeah, I would very much like to hear from others on the list, especially anybody who does have a "-p0" workflow. > Colored patches, by the way, cannot be applied, so perhaps we should > disable ui_config altogether, on the other hand? I dunno. Yeah, color is a bit weird there. We auto-disable it when the patch isn't going to stdout or a pager, so it's mostly a non-issue. I think more interesting cases are ones like diff.algorithm, diff.context, etc, where they don't break the diff, but we don't quite consider them vanilla enough for plumbing. I do wonder about diff.relative, which may or may not cause confusion on the receiving end, depending on what you're trying to achieve (are you sending a patch for somebody else's git repo, or did you make a git repo yourself and want to send a diff of some subset). Also diff.submodule, but the implications of submodule-via-format-patch are too scary for me to even contemplate. ;) -Peff