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=-5.7 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 AA3AF1F744 for ; Mon, 11 Jul 2016 19:07:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750922AbcGKTHt (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Jul 2016 15:07:49 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com ([64.147.108.71]:58457 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750770AbcGKTHt (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Jul 2016 15:07:49 -0400 Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 396C42C2DD; Mon, 11 Jul 2016 15:07:48 -0400 (EDT) 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=9joLbqRuDE+DtOupvsOBhepvdH0=; b=TZjuZ6 2CwzKPifegTUP91AflU1FfTu80kZzN+lMFgBr2KhUiD0r4sZxU/cuaw/ji6xPJKJ f7XZi7j416cgM9RF5Qx5qnWpnIDyqEd/7WRXdBeHdVwQQd1w0ComF0SzPvT1uff7 xCNeyxGnZZ5E4Fr4yNTnA4aX8QXx6Do/xjWb0= 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=PfAF3DDYAjgwAN7bt6n71mAe2iQ5e6T9 M6HjwvjoWOxLsbEoJuq7dTIABUi6/IRXb40QRDgymWii2mjv5gNu0BS8XEUK3fWF HtoHp3X+YixelrQVPrgVRiIfbS+umm50ME5IN2X4bqnDFPKuOgsN0QwgZel6wNcq eNpOFamJ70w= Received: from pb-smtp2.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 315D62C2DC; Mon, 11 Jul 2016 15:07:48 -0400 (EDT) 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 B056B2C2DB; Mon, 11 Jul 2016 15:07:47 -0400 (EDT) From: Junio C Hamano To: Theodore Ts'o Cc: Jeff King , Git Mailing List Subject: Re: [PATCH] pretty: add format specifiers: %gr, %gt, %gI, gi References: <20160710055402.32684-1-tytso@mit.edu> <20160710061644.GA19640@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20160710142622.GE26097@thunk.org> <20160711050201.GA18031@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20160711164317.GB3890@thunk.org> Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2016 12:07:45 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20160711164317.GB3890@thunk.org> (Theodore Ts'o's message of "Mon, 11 Jul 2016 12:43:17 -0400") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: C1712344-479A-11E6-835E-EE617A1B28F4-77302942!pb-smtp2.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Theodore Ts'o writes: >> I'm on the fence, so I'll let you decide how you want to proceed. I can >> live with "%gr" and "%gt", as they are at least symmetric with their >> author/committer counterparts. > > I'm on the fence myself. I can live with either, since either way the > long message command line will be going in .gitconfig. I have a > slight preference for %gr and %gt, as %gT isn't orthogonal with > %ad/%cd, but I could be easily pursuaded otherwise. > > Does anyone else have a strong opinion? I am fine with %gr/%gt, with the understanding that the step beyond that would not be to add %gT but to do %(reflog:...), and giving similar longform to other things like %ad so that we can move things in the "maybe cumbersome to type but more readable" direction.