Re: [PATCH] fmt-patch: understand old <his> notation

From: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Date: May 6, 2006, 21:41 UTC
Message-ID: <7viroirfur.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.63.0605062252530.4155@wbgn013.biozentrum.uni-wuerzburg.de>

Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> writes:

> When calling "git fmt-patch HEAD~5", you now get the same as if you would
> have said "git fmt-patch HEAD~5..". This makes it easier for my fingers
> which are so used to the old syntax.

While this would be easier on _my_ fingers as well, I have a suspicion that it might make more sense to make this "single ref" case to mean "HEAD~5^..HEAD~5" (if we _were_ designing a new command that is called format-patch today, that would be more natural). But probably it is too late to break it by now.

> 	I wonder: would it make sense to make add_pending_object() and 
> 	get_reference() in revision.c non-static?

I'd rather not expose such revision.c internals too much. An alternative approach would be to give instruction to revision.c (read: another flag like rev.no_walk) to tell it to do something special when the user has only one commit, but I think what you did in your patch is cleaner and sufficient.

Also we probably would want to default the diff options to show the root commit diff (rev.show_root_diff).