Re: [PATCH/POLL] git-format-patch: the default suffix is now .patch, not .txt

From: Alex Riesen <raa.lkml@gmail.com>
Date: Jan 18, 2007, 14:41 UTC
Message-ID: <81b0412b0701180641v55987657t331d6a1868dabee0@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <45AF7FE8.5060003@op5.se>

On 1/18/07, Andreas Ericsson <ae@op5.se> wrote:

Show 15 quoted lines

> Alex Riesen wrote:
> > On 1/18/07, Josh Boyer <jwboyer@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > As much as like Unix and everything related, I think it is
> >> > not reasonable to try to change the majority. Not unless
> >> > we have something earth-shattering. Well, git is, but
> >> > 0001-fix....patch in email attachment probably not.
> >>
> >> I would venture to say that the _majority_ of git users are not using
> >> Windows.
> >
> > The _real_ majority of the programmers desperately need a better
> > VCS than CVS, SVN, Perforce, SourceSafe, ClearCase, etc.
>
> They're free to use git ofcourse, provided they install cygwin or help
> migrate it to run natively on windows. I don't think anyone would cry if

My example had cygwin installed for him. Is it too unusual?

> a competent cross-platform programmer stepped up and started submitting
> patches to get git working on windows without having to resort to the
> cygwin emulation layer.

don't think so. I _would_ cry seeing how fork(2) gets ported to Windows, and you will, probably... after seeing how it is done in cygwin.

> The thing is, no-one's getting paid for it, so until someone *does* step
> up, it won't happen, as 95% of the *current* git users are still running
> what we on this list will indefinitely refer to as "a sane OS".

95% of the current users probably is not even 1% of all programmers who would gladly use it and maybe less than a fraction of percent of the ones who need it.

Show 5 quoted lines

> > People often understand "funny ways" the others may have. They
> > don't like been told they are wrong or stupid (especially when they
> > actually are stupid).
>
> I still don't see the problem. When he understands (and uses) git, the

he does not use git. He knows what the patch is (now I have explained it to him), I suppose he would still be mildly surprised seeing a file.patch, but he'll probably recover.

Show 5 quoted lines

> name and look of the patch will become blindingly clear to him, and then
> it doesn't matter if it's called .txt or .patch. He might even have some
> tool by then that displays patches color-coded and what-not (there are a
> plethora of such tools for Windows already, most of which register
> .patch and .diff as file-types they handle).

That wont happen until windows registers it for them. And that, again, wont ever happen. Every user will register .patch to notepad, visual studio or ultraedit or something else for himself.

> Otoh, *until* he uses git, the change doesn't affect him,

actually, patch works for git patches, so format-patch produces files useful output for anyone.

BTW, Junio, how about making the _default_ settable at compile time? It'd be reasonable to allow local installations choose to default to what they find the most paranoid?

> so why bother catering for his needs?

I don't know. It's kind of good style lately.