From: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2014 17:33:25 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 5/9] patch-id: document new behaviour
Message-ID: <20140424173325.GK15516@google.com>
In-Reply-To: <1398331809-11309-5-git-send-email-mst@redhat.com>

Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:

>  Documentation/git-patch-id.txt | 23 ++++++++++++++++++-----
>  1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

Ah, there's the documentation.  Please squash this with the patch that
introduces the new behavior so they can be reviewed together more
easily (both now and later when people do archeology).

[...]
> +--stable::
> +	Use a symmetrical sum of hashes as the patch ID.
> +	With this option, reordering file diffs that make up a patch or
> +	splitting a diff up to multiple diffs that touch the same path
> +	does not affect the ID.
> +	This is the default if patchid.stable is set to true.

This doesn't explain to me why I would want to use --stable versus
--unstable.  Maybe an EXAMPLES section would help?

The only reason I can think of to use --unstable is for compatibility
with historical patch-ids.  Is there any other reason?

At this point in the series there is no patchid.stable configuration.

> +--unstable::
> +	Use a non-symmetrical sum of hashes, such that reordering

What is a non-symmetrical sum?

Thanks,
Jonathan