From: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2005 21:27:33 GMT
Subject: Re: Why do we need [PATCH]?
Message-ID: <7vpsnwenqy.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>
In-Reply-To: <20051216210145.GA25311@mars.ravnborg.org>

Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org> writes:

> I looked at the source and found the -k option, but adding [PATCH]
> should not be default behaviour so this is not the correct solution.

The "correct" solution depends on where you come from.  That
extra [PATCH] is a carryover from BK days, I was told by Linus,
to make e-mailed things stand out --- I've never used BK but I
am guessing that things were not as obvious as our commit
messages, perhaps?  We have "Author/Committer" distinction so
the [PATCH] marker is redundant.

The rewrite, "git-am" does not bother with adding [PATCH], but
the original "git-applymbox", being everyday Linus' tool, was
left as it was, not to disrupt the workflow of Linus.