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=-4.3 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 6120C20989 for ; Mon, 10 Oct 2016 19:19:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751749AbcJJTTw (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Oct 2016 15:19:52 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com ([64.147.108.70]:54777 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751710AbcJJTTv (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Oct 2016 15:19:51 -0400 Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 69B1245BA5; Mon, 10 Oct 2016 15:14:17 -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=v8D5S7aScCiLFcoDI8WHFCJ+v4Q=; b=qxIxaI clwQRQxnGRKuSugVKHyIZeUXiI1vJ2p7LYs26u+4Mmwhs4Lp9RCopN7ZWvJpRdP9 OMuS6kMqoGCXkbDcXkmYzIKaVTI5pnICvu262ADNZGmtMLK4VgrBOnUm+A1oigA9 rJxttKHeCxLyY+bHLFJ1C2xjvOcXxw+mDKlqI= 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=O42+kg/tudPfhrKqcuxvV4GePZGHtlFX MM7OP0KTZjsI5DMGKCcsOCJgXFsDCSowHyMdcKZtT79UeiQNVSFDX22wQ5ebmTjR Gu7d0rh3EhyZi/gvbpK+4YmInbXmw/RZgBzv/FO8/k3IIv5sXmAf9BdftxFHa2tz 6YQL74WnwU4= Received: from pb-smtp1.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 61FEC45BA4; Mon, 10 Oct 2016 15:14:17 -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-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D25BD45BA3; Mon, 10 Oct 2016 15:14:16 -0400 (EDT) From: Junio C Hamano To: Jeff King Cc: Heiko Voigt , git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] clean up confusing suggestion for commit references References: <20161007095638.GA55445@book.hvoigt.net> <20161007143200.qw77pdsymbdmjhbw@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20161010182623.hsczlsfc6oaa2byj@sigill.intra.peff.net> Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2016 12:14:14 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20161010182623.hsczlsfc6oaa2byj@sigill.intra.peff.net> (Jeff King's message of "Mon, 10 Oct 2016 14:26:23 -0400") 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: BCFB1C6E-8F1D-11E6-AD7A-F99D12518317-77302942!pb-smtp1.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Jeff King writes: > On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 11:24:01AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > >> I no longer have preference either way myself, even though I was in >> favor of no-quotes simply because I had an alias to produce that >> format and was used to it. > > I'll admit that I don't care _that_ much and am happy to leave it up to > individual authors, as long as nobody quotes SubmittingPatches at me as > some kind of gospel when I use the no-quotes form. ;-). I just do not want to hear "gitk (or was it git-gui) produces quoted form, why are you recommending no-quoted form in SubmittingPatches?" I'd say "use common sense; sometimes it is less confusing to read without quotes and it is perfectly OK to do so if that is the case".