From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com (pb-smtp1.pobox.com [64.147.108.70]) (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 8715D1304B6 for ; Fri, 19 Apr 2024 15:43:15 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=64.147.108.70 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1713541396; cv=none; b=k7FQVNA3kAKjl0YEZJCaf0iTTs/VEVnK4gIDz7FhbjHgHi0K+Gvo9iltW/oOkOF5VY3Jo2Ngbm9V6jHu+SXsx3Abp8QDjXkaNf81MGV+J9DrYtdjf1Z/jdJPGfkXA2miWiF+3Rg6JnOUUN3Ttungp/u/JET8yc8KeklRl6uvoy4= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1713541396; c=relaxed/simple; bh=bprlks1LF+/3csF6MbJ8V0NgX8ARMG95fgn2fPydbTY=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=XSGPnfg97FxX1je7llvFMHX5qqGzMgLUhs5xHSgrCHnS5qDZ+f/HQBlE90J/RGmrpfebgB24r+YIAv8azUzCQTXOpFGDS2xcQidznQ7TovmVMjUlwJ3eEUiDGUTUWmsUuBVBv7N/1b1u6wFUQwoJOxM5DSoA+L5WyiVJvALz4Es= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=pobox.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pobox.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b=kVyu60xb; arc=none smtp.client-ip=64.147.108.70 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=pobox.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pobox.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b="kVyu60xb" Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23D881F394F; Fri, 19 Apr 2024 11:43:14 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=bprlks1LF+/3csF6MbJ8V0NgX8ARMG95fgn2fP ydbTY=; b=kVyu60xbIYJKFECWlwWSmBtg95f63Iqm+5bQmNNygVaPhGsNn6Jzyr rTym4WeyvD4oZFhV9fjoG6d+ErLh9hZj8giYk+JNuOfhjSYDayTG0NGU4zg/jpzC Z7SkfHmKrMZ1y2wq/aHQbjdEqjpzU4V+d5wPYbYcZmYUn+3lbj/I4= Received: from pb-smtp1.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B0A21F394E; Fri, 19 Apr 2024 11:43:14 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.125.229.118]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8194E1F394D; Fri, 19 Apr 2024 11:43:13 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: "Kristoffer Haugsbakk" Cc: "Dragan Simic" , "Eric Sunshine" , "Phillip Wood" , "Patrick Steinhardt" , git@vger.kernel.org, "Drew DeVault" Subject: Re: [PATCH] format-patch: ensure that --rfc and -k are mutually exclusive In-Reply-To: <0d584b86-0b48-4e7f-b81c-fdb672dac98b@app.fastmail.com> (Kristoffer Haugsbakk's message of "Fri, 19 Apr 2024 15:43:10 +0200") References: <71d195c248879e7c46fac0e84c6b0a8aa90bd2c2.1713488563.git.dsimic@manjaro.org> <0d584b86-0b48-4e7f-b81c-fdb672dac98b@app.fastmail.com> Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2024 08:43:12 -0700 Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 88356C24-FE63-11EE-B0FE-78DCEB2EC81B-77302942!pb-smtp1.pobox.com "Kristoffer Haugsbakk" writes: > On Fri, Apr 19, 2024, at 03:05, Dragan Simic wrote: >> Fix a bug that allows the "--rfc" and "-k" options to be specified together >> when "git format-patch" is executed, which was introduced in the commit >> e0d7db7423a9 ("format-patch: --rfc honors what --subject-prefix sets"). >> >> Add a couple of additional tests to t4014, to cover additional cases of >> the mutual exclusivity between different "git format-patch" options. >> >> Signed-off-by: Dragan Simic > > Looks good to me FWIW. Also very good description of the changes from > the previous version to this one. Yup, very easy to follow what changed and how. Will queue, thanks all.