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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED5BCC433DB for ; Fri, 19 Mar 2021 15:37:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99E5C61944 for ; Fri, 19 Mar 2021 15:37:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229736AbhCSPgo (ORCPT ); Fri, 19 Mar 2021 11:36:44 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com ([64.147.108.70]:57248 "EHLO pb-smtp1.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230063AbhCSPg3 (ORCPT ); Fri, 19 Mar 2021 11:36:29 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6BDEBBA09A; Fri, 19 Mar 2021 11:36:28 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=1d0PlOmy0tw82OqXDNanJ+hKrZY=; b=yBYZtX FY7JPkIzXSaVHeBPedCvsrhXJ7QOLvqOHATgkCaCDBKGYsoB+D6BqohzQ/sHTwed de9nsSQeiO7akZQnh63J1FVRiQjd3mLk5TrePYXC4lvzj95rmTLvcAfqcRlvF3iu tERQu3aA75avNZn129tZ64vGbC4wznRUtFkZE= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=g1hGoWIQ9Y0s7UYd81z815IWx46kTwKK ghhzcSwbQ57WikwjW5mvOhDRSRyiztAyi+kGMlDb4qZ+xdJDZwmPBhUq5FkD693G bEoSCPrcjZqHrbBUvspr5ne9xJm6kAQI3XKAHJNxhn7lQsxjP4uNY1WxiuLPDpTZ MxPByQ8PvK4= Received: from pb-smtp1.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6325CBA099; Fri, 19 Mar 2021 11:36:28 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.74.119.39]) (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 DCF72BA098; Fri, 19 Mar 2021 11:36:27 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: ZheNing Hu Cc: ZheNing Hu via GitGitGadget , Git List , "Bradley M. Kuhn" , Brandon Casey , Shourya Shukla , Christian Couder , Rafael Silva Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 2/3] interpret-trailers: add own-identity option References: <42590e95deeece6ba65e0432c3a59746e717fee3.1616066156.git.gitgitgadget@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2021 08:36:27 -0700 In-Reply-To: (ZheNing Hu's message of "Fri, 19 Mar 2021 17:33:23 +0800") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1.90 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: DEE3BE4A-88C8-11EB-81EB-D152C8D8090B-77302942!pb-smtp1.pobox.com Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org ZheNing Hu writes: > If `--own-identity` is mouthful, is there a better name? I originally had "perhaps XXXX?" in the message you are responding to, but I hoped that the message, especially the examples at the end, would be sufficient to make you realize that the option itself is not such a great idea (an additional ":@gitster" in whatever syntax used would be even shorter than "--own-identity", and obviously more flexible in that it can name other people). If you really want to have this option, perhaps call it "--self"? I still do not think it is a good idea, though.