Re: [PATCH v2] format-patch: Add --rfc for the common case of [RFC PATCH]

From: Jacob Keller <jacob.keller@gmail.com>
Date: Sep 19, 2016, 23:57 UTC
Message-ID: <CA+P7+xoKV+ffVxTK6vobuxJy1pZndr7KBLo=BLPc9xiNQgYrqg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20160919235550.GC29421@cloud>

On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 4:55 PM, Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org> wrote:

Show 17 quoted lines

> On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 04:46:06PM -0700, Jacob Keller wrote:
>> On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 4:40 PM, Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org> wrote:
>> > On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 04:34:35PM -0700, Jeff King wrote:
>> >> As far as your patch goes, I'd be OK with defining:
>> >>
>> >>   --rfc::
>> >>       Pretend as if `--subject-prefix='RFC PATCH'` was given.
>> >>
>>
>> Would:
>>
>> Shorthand for `--subject-prefix='RFC PATCH'`
>>
>> be a better reading? I feel like using "pretend" is a bit weird here.
>
> My patch used "Alias for"; if you prefer "Shorthand for" I'm
> indifferent. :)

Alias seems fine to me.

Thanks, Jake