Re: [PATCH] Add --patchdepth parameter to git-am.sh

From: Andy Parkins <andyparkins@gmail.com>
Date: Feb 7, 2007, 09:59 UTC
Message-ID: <200702070959.12819.andyparkins@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <7vfy9ibcdx.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>

On Wednesday 2007 February 07 08:27, Junio C Hamano wrote:

> I do not understand this remark, as applypatch does not have -p
> either.  If we were to do this, I agree with others that this

Oh. That /would/ make it confusing. I didn't realise they both didn't have it (I thought I had used it at some point in the past, my swiss cheese memory). In that case, the patch is a lot more relevant.

> should simply be called -p (we do not have name crash with
> existing options, do we?).

I have no problem with it being "-p"; I just don't like to take valuable single letter namespace unilaterally.

Show 7 quoted lines

> After seeing that a patch does not apply because the patch was
> generated at the wrong level, it would be very natural to use
> "git apply -p0 --index .dotest/patch" and then continue with
> "git am --resolved".  So obviously, -p to git-apply is very
> useful, but -p given to "am" means all of the patches in your
> mailbox has uniformly wrong patch depth.  I wonder how common
> would that be in practice.

I added it because I had need for it; I managed to manufacture a whole series of patches at the wrong patch level. It had been hard work to make them, so I didn't feel like making them all again just to change the depth.

> But other than that "how useful would that be in practice?"
> This is wrong if you do not use any $patchdepth.

Guilty. As I said, I added it for my own use; so didn't mind too much about weird output. If I resent it would be to drop my modifications to the message (it's redundant anyway - surely you know what you specified on the command line?), so feel free to just remove that hunk.

Andy

-- 
Dr Andy Parkins, M Eng (hons), MIEE
andyparkins@gmail.com