From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pb-smtp21.pobox.com (pb-smtp21.pobox.com [173.228.157.53]) (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 E47FC171E44 for ; Tue, 28 May 2024 16:50:47 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=173.228.157.53 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1716915049; cv=none; b=jtW37StQW8aaCCzxwzrCH03pHndLoJnJiy+kMgtL9QjpvC7EW8zl7tmbmmGou2wZFWo0Iw4x6BFwRNgY82rRmnnobdbn+8JhWvau+EvLvJc9lK/uw02DEVjIeJTWVdOl58nNpuDaP1iKNOT9KB9jxWfpX3pUOeEEzkkdx6xYEQQ= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1716915049; c=relaxed/simple; bh=8jW4j5Wv1S9GqVtpqRM4layHtzdFnAgqm861WA24dQM=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=qePDGJ946G/Li4Ap3hRaC4kOFlhR+q+PNBArcHdYgi6T7fZw0CQLAHK3o0kWuFKnwuLoYNlnoQncVEJeJmo7uMtEy+9s1X6tkTnoMAqx+FXdeWNd/Jhq8BBYCse7obu+38fN5HKXc7twtzKi1AnKKL2eb2g0lXGI+3DXtOgs2Zs= 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=avP4Tjhy; arc=none smtp.client-ip=173.228.157.53 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="avP4Tjhy" Received: from pb-smtp21.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B792291EC; Tue, 28 May 2024 12:50:47 -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=8jW4j5Wv1S9GqVtpqRM4layHtzdFnAgqm861WA 24dQM=; b=avP4Tjhyb6A/3XSoLrQ9FgUP9LdtYnIhdTtxYJRPrnUlKsv/LBUolB ff3QjWf9Jfs+abnr50qT9QTRme4/i29Ly+1TSPiSD/K+a+ICsGfOZCV5L/znyaFs NalZmVfW3iKwMaK6OYymF2rZ8IyjGzcuLcHn/i/KepEtmC8mZpymM= Received: from pb-smtp21.sea.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 55FFA291EB; Tue, 28 May 2024 12:50:47 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.125.173.97]) (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 7232F291EA; Tue, 28 May 2024 12:50:44 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Patrick Steinhardt Cc: git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] format-patch: move range/inter diff at the end of a single patch output In-Reply-To: (Patrick Steinhardt's message of "Tue, 28 May 2024 15:27:35 +0200") References: <20240523225007.2871766-1-gitster@pobox.com> <20240523225007.2871766-3-gitster@pobox.com> Date: Tue, 28 May 2024 09:50:43 -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: 6CDCEC04-1D12-11EF-8E7C-A19503B9AAD1-77302942!pb-smtp21.pobox.com Patrick Steinhardt writes: > Yeah, that's definitely better. Whether it's preferable over having it > after the signature separator I don't know. I personally liked that > version better, but can totally see why others may not like it. I do not think anybody posted a version that writes inter/range diff ater the signature mark. > Hm. By now I've gotten a bit indifferent, to be honest. I'm not a 100% > sure whether it's an improvement or not, but I don't have a strong > opinion either way. I am not sure what two you are comparing. The current version with inter/range diff that is before the diffstat and the proposed one that places inter/range diff after the main patch? Between them, I do have a strong preference. Or placing the inter/range diff after the main patch, before or after the signature mark? As a reader of such a patch, I do not have strong preference myself, either, but the signature mark is a convention, established and honored for more than a few decades, to say "no interesting contents come after this line". I do not think of a strong reason to go against that convention. We certainly could use the "---" after the main patch before we add the inter/range diff. I had such a version but its output looked rather ugly. Because the inter/range diff output are designed to be very distinct from the usual patch, I'd say something as innocuous as an extra blank line would be a good choice. Thanks.