From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail.manjaro.org (mail.manjaro.org [116.203.91.91]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AFC7313C8EA for ; Wed, 17 Apr 2024 11:44:01 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=116.203.91.91 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1713354243; cv=none; b=dA72dV/TUC2GiDO2yfeqUJJqdoxaueGKWcKjmBJEa+avk0WrQ4MUY2a7MkCIuuiobgT8zMUOggpAE4/vhI5s/AvfVI20UAoisx5HdbsrGnkIfV1yNjpmkVnc0SxTX3CiTqtxeYn1Q8wcOjT7JyDumrD7dEXxgueVS7O07r++SO8= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1713354243; c=relaxed/simple; bh=wbabYIZG7moFtHrilRsO3VsQPJOibqORvDGeL/DE8wc=; h=MIME-Version:Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References: Message-ID:Content-Type; b=NqctZ8TOPaMFx1P+M32LQ7Vk1py01xtMlsfytryawdn79KZNjNtDzSolJknd+Qm0EGcfub5OwZuAd87f4xw7zzPTZ58GR2jR63JCkJzO/uLVKzGmWySw/BAD6miQ5zT6vcQaIB2mjBf6u/N+Mu4tKJGjPu+/qZYoxSY1OZfKrAI= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=manjaro.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=manjaro.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=manjaro.org header.i=@manjaro.org header.b=k0H+hi+t; arc=none smtp.client-ip=116.203.91.91 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=manjaro.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=manjaro.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=manjaro.org header.i=@manjaro.org header.b="k0H+hi+t" Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=manjaro.org; s=2021; t=1713354239; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=XQnKH5adKaofQNE9C+2vjHi7990Akt3KEiCOZ8RAUyQ=; b=k0H+hi+tRHsFo4iVbfJn0YqP/e2aMri8o170xk2MwZn9wXKYEFnZpjQfEO/NXBv5tkh06e tLBPEdzLY6Q8sdCMp3eBXj7NnODBWpKUvZd5Y5dx2CUc0vVVxsrlSOyekf6FEV6hKb9kyQ R/cMC9raK108He4dtaMm2+yBKLfgiGtQxlpS8L7S+rPTG03HDttQLDNbsJh3aiGwT8+vPQ 60Pf9IRU8610tTgrJuGyTCC3Gmzwx5mv8c2mzm103zlBv7FFpSg9qgcekFfP2OFxEzq5+W Hx3oR8/Mstj94pUZqngzrNfw6bFKegTRM8G8Jp1DOLXqMow0lxDeW92oWPRQ0A== Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2024 13:43:59 +0200 From: Dragan Simic To: Kristoffer Haugsbakk Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Phillip Wood , Eric Sunshine Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] format-patch: new --resend option for adding "RESEND" to patch subjects In-Reply-To: References: <1d9c6ce3df714211889453c245485d46b43edff6.1713324598.git.dsimic@manjaro.org> <154b085c-3e92-4eb6-b6a6-97aa02f8f07d@gmail.com> <1f31004bd8445e1e4717817638d5509a@manjaro.org> Message-ID: X-Sender: dsimic@manjaro.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Authentication-Results: ORIGINATING; auth=pass smtp.auth=dsimic@manjaro.org smtp.mailfrom=dsimic@manjaro.org On 2024-04-17 13:34, Dragan Simic wrote: > On 2024-04-17 13:31, Kristoffer Haugsbakk wrote: >> On Wed, Apr 17, 2024, at 12:52, Dragan Simic wrote: >>> On 2024-04-17 12:02, Phillip Wood wrote: >>>> On 17/04/2024 04:32, Dragan Simic wrote: >>>>> Add --resend as the new command-line option for "git format-patch" >>>>> that adds >>>>> "RESEND" as a (sub)suffix to the patch subject prefix, eventually >>>>> producing >>>>> "[PATCH RESEND]" as the default patch subject prefix. >>>>> >>>>> "[PATCH RESEND]" is a patch subject prefix commonly used on mailing >>>>> lists >>>>> for patches resent to a mailing list after they had attracted no >>>>> attention >>>>> for some time, usually for a couple of weeks. As such, this >>>>> subject >>>>> prefix >>>>> deserves adding --resend as a new shorthand option to "git >>>>> format-patch". >>>> >>>> Playing devil's advocate for a minute, is this really common enough >>>> to >>>> justify a new option when the user can use "--subject-prefix='PATCH >>>> RESEND'" instead? >>> >>> Based on my experience, "[PATCH RESEND]" is roughly as commonly >>> used as "[PATCH RFC]". In other words, it obviously isn't used >>> as much as the good, old plain "[PATCH]", but it is used. >> >> The format-patch generated string is `RFC PATCH`. > > True. It's just that I more often see "PATCH RFC", for some reason. > Please note that I'm also taking other mailing lists into account. > >> The number of emails with `PATCH RESEND` for this list:[1] >> >> $ git log --oneline --fixed-strings --grep='[PATCH RESEND' | wc -l >> 28 >> >> For RFC: >> >> $ git log --oneline --fixed-strings --grep='[RFC PATCH' | wc -l >> 1181 >> >> † 1: According to http://lore.kernel.org/git/1 > > I wonder what does it say for "RESEND" only? Here are some numbers pulled from https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kernel/: - "RFC": ~400,000 - "PATCH RFC": ~50,000 - "RFC PATCH": ~200,000 - "RESEND": ~200,000 - "PATCH RESEND": ~30,000 - "RESEND PATCH": ~30,000 Though, I'm not sure how accurate those numbers are. Even a cursory look at the produced search results shows inaccuracy of the search matches. There's probably some "fuzzy logic" at play there.