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=-4.0 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_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 75F3A1FA00 for ; Thu, 4 Mar 2021 01:11:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1354586AbhCDBDn (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Mar 2021 20:03:43 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com ([64.147.108.71]:58890 "EHLO pb-smtp2.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1356179AbhCDAzV (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Mar 2021 19:55:21 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF3ADBF18B; Wed, 3 Mar 2021 19:54:40 -0500 (EST) (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=Q53JVrMXDgHSCpT/j2SMLYdJcZg=; b=XySjPW JDe1M0GqupzD4N/3zSwiTPOffQ5WAkLy2HezUA4+SoZK/qTVyVrXC3flSIYS4Hfn zGhPTaNpz8rx+oB+GSMo1D/A5xGs4eNnpC3T1oBtvgw2p17N87/G1jUIdmvYUS4v hdUCWWrU1RM2mrLCJcDeWP6Wu/woUU+QZY9uA= 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=WhYq0dkToYp/mVBlUR0e73SPpIche2/V nS0iAVMeANS6gQethN8eHWlCG8tyZGp+zcT9WEKTKgnA5bmvdc1CnDMuUflxVmfZ 9CzCRSjTk53R1uYiNuUSx7yf6MEdo7PbPgAhkN3r1Ezn9GRXMhXiruS6haUOfStZ pzc4kTcbyiE= Received: from pb-smtp2.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B6B1FBF18A; Wed, 3 Mar 2021 19:54:40 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.74.119.39]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 44A31BF189; Wed, 3 Mar 2021 19:54:40 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Denton Liu Cc: ZheNing Hu via GitGitGadget , git@vger.kernel.org, Eric Sunshine , ZheNing Hu Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] format-patch: allow a non-integral version numbers References: Date: Wed, 03 Mar 2021 16:54:39 -0800 In-Reply-To: (Denton Liu's message of "Wed, 3 Mar 2021 01:02:55 -0800") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1.90 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 334A445A-7C84-11EB-A7FF-74DE23BA3BAF-77302942!pb-smtp2.pobox.com Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Denton Liu writes: > Hmm, others may disagree but I don't really like the idea of > `--previous-count`. It may be useful for populating "Range-diff vs " > instead of just "Range-diff" but I don't think it's worth the cost of > maintaining this option. It really depends on the target audience. As a reviewer who may be too busy to read every iteration of a series, I would probably find it useless if it gives just "range-diff" or "range-diff with last" without saying which exact round. Obviously, if you are not doing range-diff, it will not be an issue. If the patch requires (I didn't read the latest one) the previous-count to be given when range-diff or interdiff is not requested, it should probably be fixed. I am also OK with any design decision, as long as it will not close the door for the occasionally requested feature to carry over cover letter material from the previous round to the current one. Thanks.