Re: [PATCH 1/2] bisect--helper: use OPT_CMDMODE instead of OPT_BOOL

From: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Date: May 4, 2016, 12:21 UTC
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1605041416030.9313@virtualbox>
In-Reply-To: <CAP8UFD2k=JMYUg1SPE1TP6uD1bUnheYs8YhFDrzgEny85ocQFw@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Chris,

On Wed, 4 May 2016, Christian Couder wrote:

Show 9 quoted lines

> On Wed, May 4, 2016 at 1:05 PM, Johannes Schindelin
> <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> wrote:
> 
> > So... why not just say "bisect--helper: prepare for modes other than
> > 'next-all'"?
> 
> For (an extreme) example, in my patch series about libifying "git apply"
> functionality, should many of the patches have subjects like
> "builtin/apply: prepare for an apply.{c,h} lib"?

You are deliberately misunderstanding me.

If your patch series contained *one* patch whose intent was to prepare for a libified 'apply', yes, indeed, I would think that it would make for a fine commit subject. Especially if the other patches tried to do completely unrelated things. Then your "low-level" change would really benefit from a "high-level" commit message: the "low-level" aspect is seen easily enough in the patch itself, thankyouverymuch.

It really misrepresents my comment to pretend that I had tried to suggest something as utterly confusing as identically repeated commit subjects.

Ciao, Johannes