From: Kristoffer Haugsbakk <code@khaugsbakk.name>
Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2026 16:00:26 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH] doc: add caveat about roundtripping format-patch
Message-ID: <64649b1c-d3c8-42f1-b176-27f3fe8b6e46@app.fastmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <7e6a19c0-332c-40dd-8aee-f6dd9324bcfa@gmail.com>

On Tue, Feb 10, 2026, at 11:57, Phillip Wood wrote:
>>>[snip]
>>> Is this last sentence referring to diffs in the commit message being
>>> applied? I don't think there are circumstances where the patch itself is
>>> not applied correctly.
>>
>> I tested with a line like
>>
>>      Index x
>>
>> Yesterday and got an empty patch when running git-am(1). But I couldn’t
>> reproduce now. I must have made a mistake.
>
> Oh, if you use "Index: x" (with a colon) does that mess up the patch
> application?

Sorry, I think I made a typo. I did test with something like `Index:
something`. I’m pretty sure I did...

But now I’ve taken the description from git-am(1) for the
delimiters. I’ve moved away from trying to explain each case.

>>[snip]
>> I don’t understand? It demonstrates a markup for code which does not use
>> indentation.
>
> But I think the markup is a distraction from the problem which is that
> the diff is not indented.

I’ve dropped the code blocks in v2 since you don’t need a code block to
show indentation. Or code fences.

> Also calling it "Github MarkDown" is unfortunate as we try not to
> favor one forge over another and many sites support that syntax.

Sure. I can just say MarkDown code fence. Such a code fence does not use
indentation so it’s clear that we are contrasting with the MD
alternative of just indentation.

Thanks!