From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.1 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8DF681F462 for ; Thu, 13 Jun 2019 20:56:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727408AbfFMU4m (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 Jun 2019 16:56:42 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com ([173.228.157.52]:56531 "EHLO pb-smtp20.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725747AbfFMU4m (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 Jun 2019 16:56:42 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 460E47854D; Thu, 13 Jun 2019 16:56:40 -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=Th7zk/XcloAvA4TS+VTL2XtFEFg=; b=Ko3QWY 3jpkMEox8muEviWyDfU/0IaWj6JC6A2iZsPL0GOlMg8Y2mG5gUMcbPn4hVuJpPUx dWijZLTCfWDBRwDMfJg8dp/oXJW3m2DBoI0aG1b1cY6LTZtlkIEZ6i0oq1gqbGVw 6a4BdhEZupS5HWboo8g+8JlPZKoZ4usQ7NyYc= 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=gB1+rSfeoFgnn9+7NrQrzxwOyUDs0JxX zsbktdIgeMfDiDkeZj/AefY8PMMNYT/5BxFrCOehIYGVTrXUEj7IQiEiHa4TY+Pu ZhDcO+kTgGCMurw8J1QXI7bdkjOLDDMwUN/JkliH3/quGnnOQZBS59m6W1UJdOKk Ehv5H3lOnvg= Received: from pb-smtp20.sea.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D5817854C; Thu, 13 Jun 2019 16:56:40 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.76.80.147]) (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 B20E678548; Thu, 13 Jun 2019 16:56:36 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Denton Liu Cc: git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: What's cooking in git.git (Jun 2019, #03; Wed, 12) References: <20190613020517.GA15030@archbookpro.localdomain> Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2019 13:56:34 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20190613020517.GA15030@archbookpro.localdomain> (Denton Liu's message of "Wed, 12 Jun 2019 22:05:17 -0400") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: BBCBF58C-8E1D-11E9-9FE4-B0405B776F7B-77302942!pb-smtp20.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Denton Liu writes: > Would it be possible for you to queue the "teach branch-specific options > for format-patch" patchset[1]? Even if it doesn't make it in its current > form, I believe that this patchset contains some changes that should be > relatively uncontroversial. Hmph. I was under the impression that they were abandoned, allowing "includeif.onbranch" to supersede it as a more general solution. Looking back at the discussion thread cited *1* https://public-inbox.org/git/cover.1558492582.git.liu.denton@gmail.com/ it seems that the more general includeIf topic stirred enough interest but not those 8 patches from v3 (or from v2). If you feel strongly enough, re-post them to ignite renewed interest in list readers' minds, perhaps? Thanks.