From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM, RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 874491FCA9 for ; Mon, 19 Sep 2016 09:17:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752786AbcISJRi (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Sep 2016 05:17:38 -0400 Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.156.1]:45471 "EHLO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752711AbcISJRg (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Sep 2016 05:17:36 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098409.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.17/8.16.0.17) with SMTP id u8J9Dwb4092622 for ; Mon, 19 Sep 2016 05:17:34 -0400 Received: from e23smtp08.au.ibm.com (e23smtp08.au.ibm.com [202.81.31.141]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 25hxp0hpqr-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Mon, 19 Sep 2016 05:17:34 -0400 Received: from localhost by e23smtp08.au.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Mon, 19 Sep 2016 19:17:31 +1000 Received: from d23dlp03.au.ibm.com (202.81.31.214) by e23smtp08.au.ibm.com (202.81.31.205) with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted; Mon, 19 Sep 2016 19:17:30 +1000 Received: from d23relay10.au.ibm.com (d23relay10.au.ibm.com [9.190.26.77]) by d23dlp03.au.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC41E357805A for ; Mon, 19 Sep 2016 19:17:29 +1000 (EST) Received: from d23av03.au.ibm.com (d23av03.au.ibm.com [9.190.234.97]) by d23relay10.au.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id u8J9HTbJ4260206 for ; Mon, 19 Sep 2016 19:17:29 +1000 Received: from d23av03.au.ibm.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by d23av03.au.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id u8J9HTrR012954 for ; Mon, 19 Sep 2016 19:17:29 +1000 Received: from ozlabs.au.ibm.com (ozlabs.au.ibm.com [9.192.253.14]) by d23av03.au.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/NCO v10.0 AVin) with ESMTP id u8J9HTEh012949; Mon, 19 Sep 2016 19:17:29 +1000 Received: from [10.61.2.248] (haven.au.ibm.com [9.192.254.114]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ozlabs.au.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 98981A01F3; Mon, 19 Sep 2016 19:17:28 +1000 (AEST) Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] format-patch: Add --rfc for the common case of [RFC PATCH] To: Josh Triplett , git@vger.kernel.org References: Cc: Jeff King From: Andrew Donnellan Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2016 19:17:28 +1000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/45.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-TM-AS-MML: disable X-Content-Scanned: Fidelis XPS MAILER x-cbid: 16091909-0048-0000-0000-000001BF00EF X-IBM-AV-DETECTION: SAVI=unused REMOTE=unused XFE=unused x-cbparentid: 16091909-0049-0000-0000-00004694D0B1 Message-Id: <3df15bbb-7eac-86ec-2ccb-74a973482e8c@au1.ibm.com> X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:,, definitions=2016-09-19_06:,, signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 spamscore=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1609020000 definitions=main-1609190130 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On 17/09/16 17:21, Josh Triplett wrote: > This provides a shorter and more convenient alias for > --subject-prefix='RFC PATCH'. > > Includes documentation in the format-patch manpage, and a new test > covering --rfc. > > Signed-off-by: Josh Triplett Sounds good to me. Agreed that "RFC" is essentially the only prefix other than "PATCH" that I see, at least in the kernel. I don't have anything to say about the code, though I did note that there's a error message stating that "--subject-prefix and -k are mutually exclusive." - I haven't tested the patch, but I imagine this message will trigger with --rfc as well and could be slightly confusing. > --- > v2: > - Add documentation to the format-patch manpage > - Call subject_prefix_callback rather than reimplementing it > - Update test to move expectations inside > > Documentation/git-format-patch.txt | 8 +++++++- > builtin/log.c | 8 ++++++++ > t/t4014-format-patch.sh | 9 +++++++++ > 3 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/Documentation/git-format-patch.txt b/Documentation/git-format-patch.txt > index 9624c84..b9590a5 100644 > --- a/Documentation/git-format-patch.txt > +++ b/Documentation/git-format-patch.txt > @@ -19,7 +19,8 @@ SYNOPSIS > [--start-number ] [--numbered-files] > [--in-reply-to=Message-Id] [--suffix=.] > [--ignore-if-in-upstream] > - [--subject-prefix=Subject-Prefix] [(--reroll-count|-v) ] > + [--rfc] [--subject-prefix=Subject-Prefix] > + [(--reroll-count|-v) ] > [--to=] [--cc=] > [--[no-]cover-letter] [--quiet] [--notes[=]] > [] > @@ -172,6 +173,11 @@ will want to ensure that threading is disabled for `git send-email`. > allows for useful naming of a patch series, and can be > combined with the `--numbered` option. > > +--rfc:: > + Alias for `--subject-prefix="RFC PATCH"`. Use this when > + sending an experimental patch for discussion rather than > + application. Perhaps mention the phrase "Request For Comment" for the benefit of those who aren't familiar (which admittedly, among users of git-format-patch, are probably rather few, but still). -- Andrew Donnellan OzLabs, ADL Canberra andrew.donnellan@au1.ibm.com IBM Australia Limited