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-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_PASS, SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id A52D11F66F for ; Wed, 4 Nov 2020 17:13:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1731175AbgKDRNq (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Nov 2020 12:13:46 -0500 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([104.130.231.41]:47508 "EHLO cloud.peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1730362AbgKDRNq (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Nov 2020 12:13:46 -0500 Received: (qmail 10387 invoked by uid 109); 4 Nov 2020 17:13:46 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.2) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with ESMTP; Wed, 04 Nov 2020 17:13:46 +0000 Authentication-Results: cloud.peff.net; auth=none Received: (qmail 12290 invoked by uid 111); 4 Nov 2020 17:13:45 -0000 Received: from coredump.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.2) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with (TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Wed, 04 Nov 2020 12:13:45 -0500 Authentication-Results: peff.net; auth=none Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 12:13:44 -0500 From: Jeff King To: Eric Sunshine Cc: Johannes Postler , Git List Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] format-patch: refactor output selection Message-ID: <20201104171344.GA3047090@coredump.intra.peff.net> References: <20201104132428.GA2491189@coredump.intra.peff.net> <20201104132522.GA3030146@coredump.intra.peff.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Nov 04, 2020 at 12:01:53PM -0500, Eric Sunshine wrote: > > diff --git a/builtin/log.c b/builtin/log.c > > @@ -1942,20 +1942,20 @@ int cmd_format_patch(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix) > > + if (use_stdout + !!output_directory > 1) > > + die(_("specify only one of --stdout, --output, and --output-directory")); > > Is mention of --output intentional here? The commit message only talks > about --stdout and --output-directory. Whoops, thanks. I wrote this line after adding the new feature, but forgot to revise it when I rebased. > It's subjective, but "mutually exclusive" sounds a bit more consistent > with other similar error messages elsewhere: > > --stdout, --output, and --output-directory are mutually exclusive Yeah, that reads better. I remember I reworded it a few times to try to get it not-awkward, but I'm not sure how I failed to come up with that quite obvious wording. ;) -Peff