Re: [PATCH 1/2] format-patch: fix dashdash usage

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Nov 27, 2009, 00:03 UTC
Message-ID: <7vhbsg25sb.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
In-Reply-To: <94a0d4530911261523q25147f12h2e6c9e4fe4f6b12b@mail.gmail.com>

Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com> writes:

> How about 'git format-patch --full-diff'? Isn't that a valid way to
> filter patches just like --author, --grep, and so on?

Our messages obviously crossed and I think we are in agreement that pathspec that only is used to pick which commit to show and not limits which parts of the chosen commits are shown might have some uses.

In any case, your patch we are discussing, with a proper commit log message (without discussing if it is a good idea to give pathspecs) would be a good first step, regardless of which direction we end up going as the next step.

As to the "next step", my current thinking, unless there are convincing arguments why there should be a way to also limit the parts of the commits are shown, is to

 (0) take your patch with an updated message (eh, that is not "next step"
     but the "first step");

 (1) make --full-diff implicit and default of format-patch (--no-full-diff
     could be supported _if_ somebody can argue successfully why limiting
     the diff is also a useful thing to do); and

 (2) document clearly that format-patch takes optional pathspecs, and in
     what situation they are useful.

I think (0) is 'maint' material, and with a good documentation update (1) and (2) could also be.