Re: git-format-patch --subject-prefix support.

From: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Date: Apr 12, 2007, 01:52 UTC
Message-ID: <7v4pnmmk9l.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0704120150320.22924@beast.quantumfyre.co.uk>

Julian Phillips <julian@quantumfyre.co.uk> writes:

Show 22 quoted lines

> On Wed, 11 Apr 2007, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
>> "Robin H\. Johnson" <robbat2@gentoo.org> writes:
>>
>>> Add a new option to git-format-patch, entitled --subject-prefix that allows
>>> control of the subject prefix '[PATCH]'. Using this option, the text 'PATCH' is
>>> replaced with whatever input is provided to the option. This allows easily
>>> generating patches like '[PATCH 2.6.21-rc3]' or properly numbered series like
>>> '[-mm3 PATCH N/M]'.
>>>
>>> 1/2 - Implementation and documentation
>>> 2/2 - Test case
>>
>> I suspect this is a job for send-email, not format-patch.  List?
>
> Surely though, send-email is simply a helper for sending patches
> generated by format-patch?  Is there any reason to deny the ability to
> set the prefix to those who don't use send-email but do use
> format-patch? (Personally I found send-email to be cumbersome and
> confusing, so I've stopped using it ...)
>
> It's format-patch that applies the current "[PATCH]" prefix anyway ...

I was more worried about people's scripts who postprocess format-patch output, relying on the '[PATCH]' to be there. But they should be using -k to suppress it anyway, so this addition should be Ok.

Somebody needs to verify that mailinfo groks e-mails correctly even when they have "Subject: [random garbage] title" though.