{"thread":{"id":"16983","subject":"[PATCH next] git-cherry usage: correct nesting of commit-ish options","startedAt":"2009-01-04T16:11:22Z","lastAt":"2009-01-04T22:47:27Z","messageCount":5,"participants":["Markus Heidelberg","Miklos Vajna"],"isPatch":true,"patchVersion":1,"patchTotal":null},"messages":[{"id":"99308","messageId":"200901041711.23026.markus.heidelberg@web.de","threadId":"16983","inReplyTo":null,"subject":"[PATCH next] git-cherry usage: correct nesting of commit-ish options","fromName":"Markus Heidelberg","fromEmail":"markus.heidelberg@web.de","sentAt":"2009-01-04T16:11:22Z","receivedAt":"2009-01-04T16:11:22Z","isPatch":true,"sender":{"key":"markus.heidelberg@web.de","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/6334512?v=4"},"body":"\nSigned-off-by: Markus Heidelberg \n---\n\nWhat is the preferred way to say the patch is against next? In the\nsubject like this?\nAnother question: should this patch be split up into two, one for\nmaint/master and another for next?\n\n Documentation/git-cherry.txt | 2 +-\n builtin-log.c | 2 +-\n 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)\n\ndiff --git a/Documentation/git-cherry.txt b/Documentation/git-cherry.txt\nindex 556ea23..7deefda 100644\n--- a/Documentation/git-cherry.txt\n+++ b/Documentation/git-cherry.txt\n@@ -7,7 +7,7 @@ git-cherry - Find commits not merged upstream\n \n SYNOPSIS\n --------\n-'git cherry' [-v] [] [] []\n+'git cherry' [-v] [ [ []]]\n \n DESCRIPTION\n -----------\ndiff --git a/builtin-log.c b/builtin-log.c\nindex 243f857..7e9616e 100644\n--- a/builtin-log.c\n+++ b/builtin-log.c\n@@ -1071,7 +1071,7 @@ static int add_pending_commit(const char *arg, struct rev_info *revs, int flags)\n }\n \n static const char cherry_usage[] =\n-\"git cherry [-v] [] [] []\";\n+\"git cherry [-v] [ [ []]]\";\n int cmd_cherry(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix)\n {\n \tstruct rev_info revs;\n-- \n1.6.1.35.g0c23\n"},{"id":"99309","messageId":"200901041716.00673.markus.heidelberg@web.de","threadId":"16983","inReplyTo":"200901041711.23026.markus.heidelberg@web.de","subject":"Re: [PATCH next] git-cherry usage: correct nesting of commit-ish options","fromName":"Markus Heidelberg","fromEmail":"markus.heidelberg@web.de","sentAt":"2009-01-04T16:16:00Z","receivedAt":"2009-01-04T16:16:00Z","isPatch":true,"sender":{"key":"markus.heidelberg@web.de","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/6334512?v=4"},"body":"Markus Heidelberg, 04.01.2009:\n> \n> Signed-off-by: Markus Heidelberg \n> ---\n> \n> What is the preferred way to say the patch is against next? In the\n> subject like this?\n> Another question: should this patch be split up into two, one for\n> maint/master and another for next?\n\nFor the second patch against next I meant it being based on origin/next\nthat already includes the extracted patch for maint/master.\n"},{"id":"99314","messageId":"20090104173559.GG21154@genesis.frugalware.org","threadId":"16983","inReplyTo":"200901041711.23026.markus.heidelberg@web.de","subject":"Re: [PATCH next] git-cherry usage: correct nesting of commit-ish options","fromName":"Miklos Vajna","fromEmail":"vmiklos@frugalware.org","sentAt":"2009-01-04T17:35:59Z","receivedAt":"2009-01-04T17:35:59Z","isPatch":true,"sender":{"key":"vmiklos@frugalware.org","avatar":"https://gravatar.com/avatar/401c1cbbb3a5d13e650c691a2c71d6fd0b80df1a01bc74d9f1972675dd58f2bd?d=mp&s=160"},"body":"On Sun, Jan 04, 2009 at 05:11:22PM +0100, Markus Heidelberg wrote:\n> Another question: should this patch be split up into two, one for\n> maint/master and another for next?\n\nAFAIK sending patches against next is not preferred at all. You should\nsend your patches against master, or - if you have a strong reason - on\ntop of a given topic branch.\n\nIn the later case I just use to write \"This applies on top of\n'xx/foo-bar'.\" between the three dashes and the diffstat.\n"},{"id":"99316","messageId":"200901041901.18801.markus.heidelberg@web.de","threadId":"16983","inReplyTo":"20090104173559.GG21154@genesis.frugalware.org","subject":"Re: [PATCH next] git-cherry usage: correct nesting of commit-ish options","fromName":"Markus Heidelberg","fromEmail":"markus.heidelberg@web.de","sentAt":"2009-01-04T18:01:18Z","receivedAt":"2009-01-04T18:01:18Z","isPatch":true,"sender":{"key":"markus.heidelberg@web.de","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/6334512?v=4"},"body":"Miklos Vajna, 04.01.2009:\n> On Sun, Jan 04, 2009 at 05:11:22PM +0100, Markus Heidelberg wrote:\n> > Another question: should this patch be split up into two, one for\n> > maint/master and another for next?\n> \n> AFAIK sending patches against next is not preferred at all.\n\n>From Documentation/SubmittingPatches:\n\n If you are preparing a work based on \"next\" branch,\n that is fine, but please mark it as such.\n\nI guess the only reason is a required dependency not available in\n'master'.\n\n> You should\n> send your patches against master, or - if you have a strong reason - on\n> top of a given topic branch.\n\nThis patch depends on a commit in 'next'. But right, I could have\nmentioned that it's against 'mh/cherry-default' as Junio suggested a few\ndays ago.\n"},{"id":"99336","messageId":"20090104224727.GJ21154@genesis.frugalware.org","threadId":"16983","inReplyTo":"200901041901.18801.markus.heidelberg@web.de","subject":"Re: [PATCH next] git-cherry usage: correct nesting of commit-ish options","fromName":"Miklos Vajna","fromEmail":"vmiklos@frugalware.org","sentAt":"2009-01-04T22:47:27Z","receivedAt":"2009-01-04T22:47:27Z","isPatch":true,"sender":{"key":"vmiklos@frugalware.org","avatar":"https://gravatar.com/avatar/401c1cbbb3a5d13e650c691a2c71d6fd0b80df1a01bc74d9f1972675dd58f2bd?d=mp&s=160"},"body":"On Sun, Jan 04, 2009 at 07:01:18PM +0100, Markus Heidelberg wrote:\n> > AFAIK sending patches against next is not preferred at all.\n> \n> From Documentation/SubmittingPatches:\n> \n> If you are preparing a work based on \"next\" branch,\n> that is fine, but please mark it as such.\n\nOuch, then sorry for the misinformation. (Especially that it turns out\nJunio added that line in 45d2b286.)\n"}]}