From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2012 09:52:53 GMT
Subject: Re: git log -z doesn't separate commits with NULs
Message-ID: <20120224095253.GC11846@sigill.intra.peff.net>
In-Reply-To: <4F475689.4040203@gmail.com>

On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 12:21:13PM +0300, Nikolaj Shurkaev wrote:

> I'll propose to put something like this into git documentation
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> diff --git a/Documentation/git-format-patch.txt
> b/Documentation/git-format-patch.txt
> index 6ea9be7..63267c6 100644
> --- a/Documentation/git-format-patch.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/git-format-patch.txt
> @@ -23,6 +23,7 @@ SYNOPSIS
> [--cover-letter] [--quiet]
> [<common diff options>]
> [ <since> | <revision range> ]
> + [[\--] <path>...]
> 
> DESCRIPTION
> -----------
> @@ -219,6 +220,12 @@ you can use `--suffix=-patch` to get
> `0001-description-of-my-change-patch`.
> range are always formatted as creation patches, independently
> of this flag.
> 
> +[\--] <path>...::
> + Put in patches only those modifications that affect specified files
> + and folders. It's important to understand that log message of the
> + commit may become inappropriate because some parts of patch may be
> + cut off.
> +

I think that text looks OK. But to my mind, it is not that format-patch
accepts a path parameter, but rather that it takes arbitrary log-like
arguments. So you could do "git format-patch --grep=whatever", or even
something like "git format-patch --cherry".

I don't know how well tested every option is, though, so maybe it's not
a good idea to encourage the use of random options.

-Peff