Re: [PATCH 1/2] revision: add rdiff_other_arg to rev_info
- From
- Kristoffer Haugsbakk <kristofferhaugsbakk@fastmail.com>
- Date
- Sep 23, 2025, 17:47 UTC
- Message-ID
- <f1da0f06-e57c-4abd-b9ce-ef3fd5ce2037@app.fastmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <xmqqa52loyvq.fsf@gitster.g>
On Tue, Sep 23, 2025, at 19:35, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Show 22 quoted lines
> "Kristoffer Haugsbakk" <kristofferhaugsbakk@fastmail.com> writes: > >> On Mon, Sep 22, 2025, at 23:58, Junio C Hamano wrote: >>> kristofferhaugsbakk@fastmail.com writes: >>> >>>> git-format-patch(1) is supposed to treat Git notes the same between >>>> notes output beneath the commit message and the notes output for the >>>> range-diff. >>> >>> Is this an opinion, or are there things that existing pieces of code >>> already do to achieve such a behaviour already? >> >> What I mean is that >> [snip] >> That’s the point of passing `--notes` to range-diff. > > OK. So it is more like "range-diff is supposed to show comparison > of pairs of patches; if format-patch shows one set of notes after > three-dash lines in its output, range-diff invoked by format-patch > to compare its patches with another set of patches should also be > comparing patches generated with the same set of notes". That makes > sense to me.
Exactly.
I might eventually send some drafts of better commit messages.
Show 5 quoted lines
>> Thanks for the explanation. I’ve added `.rdiff_other_arg = STRVEC_INIT >> \` to `REV_INFO_INIT`. > > Yup, I think I already have a fix-up patch mixed in your series in > the integration result I pushed out last night.
Oh yeah I saw that afterwards. Which made me spot a mistake in my own fixup... which was instructive. ;)
>> Could it be as simple as `log_arg` or `log_args`? > > Yeah, that is much better than "other" (where it is unclear what are > the "primary" things that "others" are in contrast).
I remember looking at the code and having that realization: Oh, *other* is *log*. Huh.
... Maybe specifically `log_args` since it’s a `strvec`? `git grep 'struct strvec'` seems to give me a lot of plural (style).