From: Kristoffer Haugsbakk Date: Fri, 02 Oct 2026 19:13:15 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] format-patch: simplify get_notes_arg parameters Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <30249b7b-b6f7-4065-9a83-db93d69ad0f1@app.fastmail.com> On Fri, Oct 2, 2026, at 21:07, Kristoffer Haugsbakk wrote: > On Fri, Oct 2, 2026, at 19:28, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> kristofferhaugsbakk@fastmail.com writes: >> >>> From: Kristoffer Haugsbakk >>> >>> git-format-patch(1) passes on the notes behavior that it is using for >>> the patches to git-range-diff(1). In turn you get the same Git notes >>> displayed in the range diff as the ones you used to generate the >>> patches. And that makes sense in most cases. >>> >>> However, I often make notes between series versions that mostly prepend >>> ... >>> something like an alias set up with it. But why spend code closing >>> that door? There is no usability upside to erroring out. >> >> This is somewhat shared with the next step, but the commit message >> includes a lengthy narrative of the author's thought process ("An >> off/on switch is enough for this behavior...", "But now we are faced >> with a problem...", "Well, we can't. Therefore we need..."). >> >> Can we strip out the conversational journey? The log message should >> be a concise, permanent technical reference explaining the problem >> (range diff notes inherit patch notes, which may contain irrelevant >> iteration changelogs) and the solution (the new options and the >> .override flag). > > Sure. >[snip] Sorry about this duplicate that message that replied to the wrong email as well.