From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com (pb-smtp20.pobox.com [173.228.157.52]) (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 5687212B72 for ; Fri, 1 Mar 2024 18:07:15 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=173.228.157.52 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1709316436; cv=none; b=g6z8czAFxpgkjOmdfDD623va99A9scaehW0JrszEOU5YFTVUMmm0T2RflFg+4YK5x4GiL/1g05QE3R72Td5BnoIhme4Ch1TqZ3jvj2op1+Limaf+u0KtfjdnnFYiLFViUhkvdndTS5wRnAUDGG6QbTsbu58FcvIrnR1W5RrfBg0= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1709316436; c=relaxed/simple; bh=unj0eMpnOY9MRYo2MaO5c7Rr4ckP33pYmGv1JjeTKZ4=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=gkj/XdIyCtmLohjlSEqOIrZfJPtwhahjr+wtRxjJxON5I8Ie6QLy/eoFKxZtzqww2E5CEAK6Tjek1CF1br2Rm+fi40DxkN8K3wbK0JOEzu7E9G1fKyuAvsNN7LvOLiIj2k6Ynnlu4uvIHvdOH4mHy2fGTFFvaIjLwEuFpqQ8DFc= 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=KUagYBmd; arc=none smtp.client-ip=173.228.157.52 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="KUagYBmd" Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2ABB31E136; Fri, 1 Mar 2024 13:07:15 -0500 (EST) (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:content-transfer-encoding; s=sasl; bh=unj0eMpnOY9M RYo2MaO5c7Rr4ckP33pYmGv1JjeTKZ4=; b=KUagYBmdRnq8Zar9CA0rzz5dvga2 /EuRU2XMrAAPPD+cgpxtaVyuf4MHHKgxf3f1YJzz228fgiNlB7SngWLvRSoJKulM 3t9etXowsetFN1ecsX7HGjGp8XGmsoWgnTGVqVHDQ2UJZIIIyRAYP27I29p/KXHe Ii6bfwq7YTGFcfg= Received: from pb-smtp20.sea.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 232121E135; Fri, 1 Mar 2024 13:07:15 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.125.176.30]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3093D1E134; Fri, 1 Mar 2024 13:07:12 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: "Kristoffer Haugsbakk" Cc: "Sergey Organov" , git@vger.kernel.org, =?utf-8?Q?Jean-No=C3=ABl?= Avila Subject: Re: [PATCH] clean: improve -n and -f implementation and documentation In-Reply-To: <86ce3c89-4a58-42bf-a31a-96fa6b74e937@app.fastmail.com> (Kristoffer Haugsbakk's message of "Fri, 01 Mar 2024 16:29:38 +0100") References: <875xy76qe1.fsf@osv.gnss.ru> <51a196c0-ea57-4ec5-99ea-c3f09cd90962@gmail.com> <87frxam35f.fsf@osv.gnss.ru> <86ce3c89-4a58-42bf-a31a-96fa6b74e937@app.fastmail.com> Date: Fri, 01 Mar 2024 10:07:10 -0800 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; charset=utf-8 X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 87035872-D7F6-11EE-9687-F515D2CDFF5E-77302942!pb-smtp20.pobox.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable "Kristoffer Haugsbakk" writes: > On Fri, Mar 1, 2024, at 15:34, Sergey Organov wrote: >>> Please use backticks for options, configuration and environment names= : >>> `clean.requireForce` >> >> I did consider this. However, existing text already has exactly this o= ne >> unquoted, so I just did the same. Hopefully it will be fixed altogethe= r >> later, or are you positive I better resend the patch with quotes? > > Sometimes I see widespread changes (like formatting many files) get > rejected because it is considered _churn_. Not fixing this in this > series and then maybe someone else fixing it later seems like churn as > well. Isn=E2=80=99t it better to fix it while you are changing the text= ? Any one of these is fine: (1) add the new paragraph with mark-up consistent with existing text (which is what Sergey did). (2) add the new paragraph with correct mark-up, making the document less consistent overall. (3) have one patch to fix broken mark-up of existing text, followed by another patch to add the new paragraph with correct mark-up. If you take one of the first two, it would be a very good idea to have a comment in the proposed log message to note the need for later clean-up. Without being written down anywhere, your discovery and the brain cycles you spent while deciding what to do will be wasted, which is not what you want. Thanks, both.