From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.1 (2015-04-28) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.1 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9600A1F453 for ; Tue, 6 Nov 2018 04:16:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729016AbeKFNkH (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Nov 2018 08:40:07 -0500 Received: from mail-wr1-f67.google.com ([209.85.221.67]:35241 "EHLO mail-wr1-f67.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728122AbeKFNkH (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Nov 2018 08:40:07 -0500 Received: by mail-wr1-f67.google.com with SMTP id z16-v6so11890177wrv.2 for ; Mon, 05 Nov 2018 20:16:52 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id :user-agent:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=kqQQk67XgwqHCnAtrY6v9KziDUw5p91UE1vXt9RMNSU=; b=veV1J1QlHZjsuu5hdpsVR3pD6dk1tPzHDt0cGQkDDIdsIgYra4jNTU5NA5Gwj6fr9e qvz0hFme4pyL5Epy3+wPaG5FjZI7EFjVa4kWAGnINj2yy+MAmp05lAvU1pTWsqFJTG7C j7UPlgT3HQ3SxEq7s+pmG7vH/RK6SVSGf11EjxDLRxslDz++kYoMotAx5Ihuxutykakl NEra6KWNYJc0gfvG35DxQw5qZDLN6HycbInMMWngbBGJiI84WdrcghhcVFm6Zc3Lng6E 879cw+PCwzNEt7wNf9ON5HBjCoSXJAavxyf5mcCTd5oEFHj2YlVWSfsNL7GvlrSdyQpT xwtg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date :in-reply-to:message-id:user-agent:mime-version :content-transfer-encoding; bh=kqQQk67XgwqHCnAtrY6v9KziDUw5p91UE1vXt9RMNSU=; b=S56lZbpdBr6DJzb+Rz+qdCjZpowczWE6MkybcXa1VAQYKNm0Ap5EW4widA7cP4Yp6u Q16Ys/9zCUwVHWNyv5j3yQlQOKR3w2hbhOc1ZAg1VzNTb8HOKcgzphTSKaWokCX6P4sy B3T3bFdJ+2WMzR2yv0jOhU9SU2b1wnJJyCO2INckAnWkwphyDLuTq4uZ1iicwhLM2Q5f mChMIllgfn1TLQ4AIe6ZXU+9ceYN6rqyWr8VUEnk5G/39/EAkuuqVchouDGMF5T/7ogY qEGyzHSnC/tbbm2TFfA8x8Kb0YRHDFoHh2OeIH5Q+pRSO6lH2F3Q4ogi7YNfAFrBRION y4AQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AGRZ1gI/mVBAw5r0xyvOPl46KWyYY7smstZ7pq0ahIVYfRhwboQWj5jh CYkTt/oCRCG5Qe8kUFNB6PU= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AJdET5fWvx5tLzEJkONhuNETdL05n2MXQLJwSx7B/aC3K+aHI27d+mNtGEjpHZtvU7C71Y40TrTn9A== X-Received: by 2002:adf:e808:: with SMTP id o8-v6mr22051653wrm.112.1541477811549; Mon, 05 Nov 2018 20:16:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (168.50.187.35.bc.googleusercontent.com. [35.187.50.168]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id v10-v6sm11537936wrq.4.2018.11.05.20.16.49 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Mon, 05 Nov 2018 20:16:50 -0800 (PST) From: Junio C Hamano To: =?utf-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsA==?= Bjarmason Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Lucas De Marchi , Stefan Beller , Eric Sunshine , Johannes Schindelin Subject: Re: [PATCH] range-diff: add a --no-patch option to show a summary References: <20181105200650.31177-1-avarab@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 06 Nov 2018 13:16:49 +0900 In-Reply-To: <20181105200650.31177-1-avarab@gmail.com> (=?utf-8?B?IsOGdmFy?= =?utf-8?B?IEFybmZqw7Zyw7A=?= Bjarmason"'s message of "Mon, 5 Nov 2018 20:06:50 +0000") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason writes: > This change doesn't update git-format-patch with a --no-patch > option. That can be added later similar to how format-patch first > learned --range-diff, and then --creation-factor in > 8631bf1cdd ("format-patch: add --creation-factor tweak for > --range-diff", 2018-07-22). I don't see why anyone would want this for > format-patch, it pretty much defeats the point of range-diff. I am OK not to have this option integrated to format-patch from day one, but I do not think it is a good idea to hint that it should not be done later. Does it defeats the point of range-diff to omit the patch part in the context of the cover letter? How? I think the output with this option is a good addition to the cover letter as an abbreviated form (as opposed to the full range-diff, whose support was added earlier) that gives an overview. Calling this --[no-]patch might make it harder to integrate it to format-patch later, though. I suspect that people would expect "format-patch --no-patch ..." to omit both the patch part of the range-diff output *AND* the patch that should be applied to the codebase (it of course would defeat the point of format-patch, so today's format-patch would not pay attention to --no-patch, of course). We need to be careful not to break that when it happens.