From: Johannes Schindelin Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 23:28:54 GMT Subject: Re: git-format-patch possible regressions Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <7vy7wpr97n.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> Hi, On Thu, 25 May 2006, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Johannes Schindelin writes: > > > Thinking about this again, it makes more sense not to imply --numbered: > > Yes, that makes sense. That way you can say "Please start > naming the output files at 0032-xxxx.txt, because you gave me 31 > patch series last time, but I do not want [PATCH x/y] on the > subject line, just [PATCH]". > > That brings up another issue. Don't we need to have another > option --total-number that overrides the /y part above? I thought about that, too. Isn't the --numbered only useful for submitting a patch series via mail? And isn't it necessary to make certain that these patches really apply in that order? Isn't it then sensible to force the user to have a branch (at least a throw-away one) having exactly these patches, just to make sure that the patches really, really apply in that order? If all that is true, then --start-number && --numbered does not make sense at all. Ciao, Dscho