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=-5.6 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, 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 8C6F31FE4E for ; Fri, 18 Nov 2016 23:38:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752739AbcKRXiz (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Nov 2016 18:38:55 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com ([64.147.108.71]:52121 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752174AbcKRXiy (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Nov 2016 18:38:54 -0500 Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C8C55036B; Fri, 18 Nov 2016 18:38:53 -0500 (EST) 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=d2EAgPbZ/rgucmvLN6h7SDJH3LQ=; b=DbWfOj FQt6o6jRQ2pY9KH2JIH9TeAqMrJtcliem8JKZvxsuLNlsORb0eKE73TcYwg1VLH6 7TphHoaKQDw2BN3RsVCFf16MPmuEfhtJRli4EdkOHfkcnZR8eW60GIgUS+6+dAwA QbF4rCBYtP+m5VQ2aqda7SJFQ7/pdFZOUPoHM= 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=S2vL/pbI7FRY7SCxeTp85OQ6++JydGWu yORotPxKE27Qpogjsw7bnKi/5vkyQhKR8DvlsCzK4vLC7RlDEmT7dg7CtZZGUiFU qEBmWfKmWhgchIWLs05Qv/St8ke3Z56n0Yidctw1L0L5VxLONr5J1eYvocybx3Lj 9TZ65BsETdo= Received: from pb-smtp2.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 843D25036A; Fri, 18 Nov 2016 18:38:53 -0500 (EST) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [104.132.0.95]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id ED82E50369; Fri, 18 Nov 2016 18:38:52 -0500 (EST) From: Junio C Hamano To: Jacob Keller , Jonathan Tan Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Jacob Keller Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] add format specifiers to display trailers References: <20161118230825.20952-1-jacob.e.keller@intel.com> Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2016 15:38:51 -0800 In-Reply-To: <20161118230825.20952-1-jacob.e.keller@intel.com> (Jacob Keller's message of "Fri, 18 Nov 2016 15:08:23 -0800") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 29FE0C48-ADE8-11E6-AF14-3AB77A1B28F4-77302942!pb-smtp2.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Jacob Keller writes: > Git interpret-trailers will not recognize this as a trailer block > because it doesn't have any standard git tags within it. Would it be ok > to augment the trailer interpretation to say that if we have over 75% > trailers in the block that we accept it even if it doesn't have any real > recognized tags? I thought the documented way to do this is to configure one of your custom trailer as such. Jonathan? > pretty: add %bT format for displaying trailers of a commit message Are %(...) taken already? In longer term, it would be nice if we can unify the --pretty formats and for-each-ref formats, so it is probably better if we avoid adding any new short ones to the former. We have %s and %b so that we can reconstruct the whole thing by using both. It is unclear how %bT fits in this picture. I wonder if we also need another placeholder that expands to the body of the message without the trailer---otherwise the whole set would become incoherent, no?