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 363CDC83F17 for ; Mon, 28 Aug 2023 15:32:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229996AbjH1PcL (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Aug 2023 11:32:11 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:43312 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230020AbjH1Pby (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Aug 2023 11:31:54 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp21.pobox.com (pb-smtp21.pobox.com [173.228.157.53]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C7E51129 for ; Mon, 28 Aug 2023 08:31:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pb-smtp21.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 78DDE22067; Mon, 28 Aug 2023 11:31:51 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=BhjEC83eM7gAQffa8A58UvQd2zDfT6i+z+wmim hNjIk=; b=lktyDl1IktMGcPhZEuaPe/+cSuaqju5OJ65yYXoIlPFlEe9s28/X9y vrAuD/nN5RVyRDCvLgKVzIVGotSkpsW6lB5BOZyo6EuZw4bqaQlhtQm62Buent30 xn1tuU3ltUpBfi527YhtJYyUZtwhf0baAbEaBUUk7LA/DI3krTrdw= Received: from pb-smtp21.sea.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6514422066; Mon, 28 Aug 2023 11:31:51 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [35.185.212.55]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id DB65E22063; Mon, 28 Aug 2023 11:31:47 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Drew DeVault Cc: git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] builtin/log.c: prepend "RFC" on --rfc References: <20230828125132.25144-1-sir@cmpwn.com> Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2023 08:31:46 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20230828125132.25144-1-sir@cmpwn.com> (Drew DeVault's message of "Mon, 28 Aug 2023 14:50:34 +0200") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 00771D3C-45B8-11EE-B1DD-A19503B9AAD1-77302942!pb-smtp21.pobox.com Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Drew DeVault writes: > Rather than replacing the configured subject prefix (either through the > git config or command line) entirely with "RFC PATCH", this change > prepends RFC to whatever subject prefix was already in use. > > This is useful, for example, when a user is working on a repository that > has a subject prefix considered to disambiguate patches: > > git config format.subjectPrefix 'PATCH my-project' > > Prior to this change, formatting patches with --rfc would lose the > 'my-project' information. OK. My initial reaction was that we should just deprecate "--rfc" and instead use "--subject-prefix" for whatever multi-token string; that way, we do not need to worry about having to add "--wip" and other "shorthand" options ;-). But the combination of the configuration variable that specifies the tag that is used for everyday operation and a command line option that allows you to add (not replace) RFC would be a justifiable behaviour. It certainly is better than the current (original) design of "--rfc". This needs to be advertised as a backward incompatible change in the release notes, but I doubt that the fallout would be major. The implementation below looks like it is quite out of our style, but I'll read v2 instead.