Re: [PATCH 3/4] format-patch: new --resend option for adding "RESEND" to patch subjects

> On Wed, Apr 17, 2024 at 3:05 AM Dragan Simic <dsimic@manjaro.org> 
> wrote:
>> On 2024-04-17 08:35, Eric Sunshine wrote:
>> > On Tue, Apr 16, 2024 at 11:33 PM Dragan Simic <dsimic@manjaro.org>
>> > wrote:
>> >> -               die(_("options '%s' and '%s' cannot be used
>> >> together"), "--subject-prefix/--rfc", "-k");
>> >> +               die(_("options '%s' and '%s' cannot be used
>> >> together"), "--subject-prefix/--rfc/--resend", "-k");
>> >
>> > You probably want to be using die_for_incompatible_opt4() from
>> > parse-options.h here.
>> 
>> Thanks for the suggestion.  Frankly, I haven't researched the
>> available options, assuming that the current code uses the right
>> option.  Of course, I'll have a detailed look into it.
>> 
>> > (And you may want a preparatory patch which fixes the preimage to use
>> > die_for_incompatible_opt3() for --subject-prefix, --rfc, and -k
>> > exclusivity, though that may be overkill.)
>> 
>> I'm not really sure what to do.  Maybe the other reviewers would
>> prefer an orthogonal approach instead?  Maybe that would be better
>> for bisecting later, if need arises for that?
> 
> The comment about using die_for_incompatible_opt4() in this patch is
> the meaningful one.
> 
> You are very welcome to ignore the parenthesized comment about a
> preparatory patch. There is probably very little value in such a patch
> to fix the preimage to use die_for_incompatible_opt3(), only to then
> apply this patch which updates it to use die_for_incompatible_opt4().
> That would just be busy-work for you and for reviewers. I mentioned it
> only because I noticed that the preimage was doing it wrong (not using
> die_for_incompatible_opt3()), which presumably misled you into
> continuing that mistake.