From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from fout-a3-smtp.messagingengine.com (fout-a3-smtp.messagingengine.com [103.168.172.146]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DADBE281503 for ; Tue, 23 Sep 2025 17:48:14 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=103.168.172.146 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1758649698; cv=none; b=eT5SB/LIIYwXCCtzzThNGl12y2j7C+x/5lEbDxT21AZJjqxaS585vFR69SuzSMn7hjZpkO4md9esGyGCT9/RcGYdlLPJfYEBBAb14CpgV3DRv4ZmhCR+Vf9aVjFK1jye1FunaFF0fl7c71rwf2nTsghRdxIRza5KeO7mlXuNeRQ= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1758649698; c=relaxed/simple; bh=88phrxrdec6/HR8dLRL8b3R/GMYIPLRvBeewXdF+OeE=; h=MIME-Version:Date:From:To:Cc:Message-Id:In-Reply-To:References: Subject:Content-Type; b=Hol81fy5j8jXnx/9S7H2UNKqDcslthCfNx8ayhU2xMfCjj2w7I7mNSCy6ahJFpLoK3giF7tm9yYlk+k1prO86qb59QYbHg2RIGiIH7xZ81lFIFe/JWJ8KZ3hyMrhXLc88ScF/hQ73EogVh6BMHraux5GQhQyeJz5hq9TGTL5TDE= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=fastmail.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=fastmail.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=fastmail.com header.i=@fastmail.com header.b=az1LYZTc; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b=jOm1/Iu/; arc=none smtp.client-ip=103.168.172.146 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=fastmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=fastmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=fastmail.com header.i=@fastmail.com header.b="az1LYZTc"; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b="jOm1/Iu/" Received: from phl-compute-09.internal (phl-compute-09.internal [10.202.2.49]) by mailfout.phl.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB87FEC01C0; Tue, 23 Sep 2025 13:48:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: from phl-imap-07 ([10.202.2.97]) by phl-compute-09.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 23 Sep 2025 13:48:13 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fastmail.com; h= cc:cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type:content-type:date :date:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :references:reply-to:subject:subject:to:to; s=fm1; t=1758649693; x=1758736093; bh=qtyVU+xLb8tAK5mDD5psf8QD8DhOIuIZ1Nawqc3Nam0=; b= az1LYZTcVhZjRgvo4eztPmqCDQ7/Z3buC5JQIMuYw+DDsi+PK6ZV2pAeCsobwOg5 1o4JI0w9NN8uQ/7vg66eQQxVktnvnTYaVLgviVvpgrOw75ofl+U+vvXzO9jj3N1Z uaXsGjbEo1ZpBszU+Gd3hiZrQeQIiE/ckJ+QHj+hbwNEbW6WysEoPoZkS1HwwWec tykqYw/QYD/hl9bpI/t+70Xo6/Sok7DSrcfx4OhUaJhd/F11VXWu6g+Dpeu/X7XL 5DqEn5hTv9b3WODGNgHJoOGcDkv1Gez3ZLY1KlrSGX3rwQnR1VxRFmsWpwGVjVTc YoVQX38B6tsFGPYadxfP8A== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-transfer-encoding :content-type:content-type:date:date:feedback-id:feedback-id :from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :references:reply-to:subject:subject:to:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; t=1758649693; x= 1758736093; bh=qtyVU+xLb8tAK5mDD5psf8QD8DhOIuIZ1Nawqc3Nam0=; b=j Om1/Iu/kWaLbIZEJSZlO9KsJ9jjcqVNMev9VBChSgrrcMeq7bXeAn9Y4QGVbhK4t +1g9+YG3yLFouw8Qx2XD09Wf29hs7P/yx/voNHGEhwcwjzHL4bWPAwJV7prgZHVE OA4g1BJ8LxVs5m2+AEltqalWfhzdPmk2DgqxGtdEaLYvWzKzDUMGMowi9klLPPe4 vjBxTz3cULhE1/KTojSNZP59kH017bgQgnn7E705044mTjTYydKRQNoitetEPl+N TzlBqm1BjRaTqPd5TWrkNUsuu94dOvFeaWjgEcewUc9XQl+R25FkMYpnvLezlIif htpwVxQg6LRWs1Hu37mGg== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeeffedrtdeggdeiudefjecutefuodetggdotefrod ftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecuuegr ihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecunecujfgurhepofggfffhvfevkfgjfhfutgfgsehtqhertd ertdejnecuhfhrohhmpedfmfhrihhsthhofhhfvghrucfjrghughhssggrkhhkfdcuoehk rhhishhtohhffhgvrhhhrghughhssggrkhhksehfrghsthhmrghilhdrtghomheqnecugg ftrfgrthhtvghrnheptdeigfegjeegjefhheeuvdegjeekleeguddukeeljeektdevjefg iefgfeekudfgnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrh homhepkhhrihhsthhofhhfvghrhhgruhhgshgsrghkkhesfhgrshhtmhgrihhlrdgtohhm pdhnsggprhgtphhtthhopedvpdhmohguvgepshhmthhpohhuthdprhgtphhtthhopehgih htshhtvghrsehpohgsohigrdgtohhmpdhrtghpthhtohepghhithesvhhgvghrrdhkvghr nhgvlhdrohhrgh X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: i8b11424c:Fastmail Received: by mailuser.phl.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id AD4631EA0068; Tue, 23 Sep 2025 13:48:13 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-ThreadId: AV1qRGHblxFk Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2025 19:47:52 +0200 From: "Kristoffer Haugsbakk" To: "Junio C Hamano" Cc: git@vger.kernel.org Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] revision: add rdiff_other_arg to rev_info Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Sep 23, 2025, at 19:35, Junio C Hamano wrote: > "Kristoffer Haugsbakk" writes: > >> On Mon, Sep 22, 2025, at 23:58, Junio C Hamano wrote: >>> kristofferhaugsbakk@fastmail.com writes: >>> >>>> git-format-patch(1) is supposed to treat Git notes the same between >>>> notes output beneath the commit message and the notes output for the >>>> range-diff. >>> >>> Is this an opinion, or are there things that existing pieces of code >>> already do to achieve such a behaviour already? >> >> What I mean is that >> [snip] >> That=E2=80=99s the point of passing `--notes` to range-diff. > > OK. So it is more like "range-diff is supposed to show comparison > of pairs of patches; if format-patch shows one set of notes after > three-dash lines in its output, range-diff invoked by format-patch > to compare its patches with another set of patches should also be > comparing patches generated with the same set of notes". That makes > sense to me. Exactly. I might eventually send some drafts of better commit messages. >> Thanks for the explanation. I=E2=80=99ve added `.rdiff_other_arg =3D= STRVEC_INIT >> \` to `REV_INFO_INIT`. > > Yup, I think I already have a fix-up patch mixed in your series in > the integration result I pushed out last night. Oh yeah I saw that afterwards. Which made me spot a mistake in my own fixup... which was instructive. ;) >> Could it be as simple as `log_arg` or `log_args`? > > Yeah, that is much better than "other" (where it is unclear what are > the "primary" things that "others" are in contrast). I remember looking at the code and having that realization: Oh, *other* is *log*. Huh. ... Maybe specifically `log_args` since it=E2=80=99s a `strvec`? `git g= rep 'struct strvec'` seems to give me a lot of plural (style).