From: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2012 16:53:56 GMT
Subject: Re: stripping [PATCH] without losing later tags from mailed patches (Re: [ 02/12] Remove COMPAT_IA32 support)
Message-ID: <20120312165356.GD12405@1wt.eu>
In-Reply-To: <87aa3l4vqq.fsf@thomas.inf.ethz.ch>

On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 05:41:49PM +0100, Thomas Rast wrote:
> [+cc Junio because of backwards-compat issues]
> 
> Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu> writes:
> 
> > On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 08:20:04AM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> >> 
> >> I don't see a -b option to 'git am' in the manpage, am I missing
> >> something here?
> >
> > It's in the master tree only right now, and the option is "--keep-non-patch"
> > (could have been shorter). Currently rebuilding to test it :-)
> 
> Exactly.
> 
> The problem with -b is that it's a backwards-compatibility shorthand for
> --binary, which used to pass --allow-binary-replacement (or --binary) to
> git-apply.  However, that option was obsoleted in 2b6eef9 (Make apply
> --binary a no-op., 2006-09-06) and has been a no-op for over 5 years.
> It has also not been documented since cb3a160 (git-am: ignore --binary
> option, 2008-08-09).
> 
> So perhaps we can safely claim -b for --keep-non-patch, like so:

Yes I do think so, especially since 5 years ago, git commands were
called hyphenated like "git-am" instead of "git am". So I don't think
there's any risk in reusing the option.

Regards,
Willy