From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jakub Narebski Subject: Re: git-format-patch possible regressions Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 08:26:49 +0200 Organization: At home Message-ID: References: <7vhd3dubd9.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <7vy7wpr97n.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <7v4pzdqpit.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri May 26 08:27:03 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 1FjVmo-0005MF-5s for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Fri, 26 May 2006 08:27:02 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751280AbWEZG0w (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 May 2006 02:26:52 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751289AbWEZG0w (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 May 2006 02:26:52 -0400 Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.229.2]:4832 "EHLO ciao.gmane.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751280AbWEZG0w (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 May 2006 02:26:52 -0400 Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1FjVmc-0005LB-OA for git@vger.kernel.org; Fri, 26 May 2006 08:26:50 +0200 Received: from 193.0.122.19 ([193.0.122.19]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 26 May 2006 08:26:50 +0200 Received: from jnareb by 193.0.122.19 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 26 May 2006 08:26:50 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: git@vger.kernel.org X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 193.0.122.19 User-Agent: KNode/0.7.7 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Junio C Hamano wrote: > So the way for qgit to use it would become something like this. > Instead of giving a list of ranges like "a..b c..d e..f": > > * Run "format-patch a..b"; by reading from its stdout you know > what patches you got -- you count them. > > * Run "format-patch --start-number=6 c..d" (if you got 5 out of > a..b); [...] I still think that having _shortcut notation_ being different for very different commands is not a bad idea. If one is really concerned about consistency of rev-list options, we could use ',' or something to separate separate lists of commits, e.g. git format-patch a..b , c..d , e..f or git format-patch a..b --then c..d --then e..f What do you think about the idea? -- Jakub Narebski Warsaw, Poland