Re: [PATCH] format-patch: do not let its diff-options affect --range-diff (was Re: [PATCH 2/2] format-patch: allow for independent diff & range-diff options)
- From
Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
- Date
- Nov 30, 2018, 12:32 UTC
- Message-ID
- <nycvar.QRO.7.76.6.1811301331320.41@tvgsbejvaqbjf.bet>
- In-Reply-To
- <xmqq36rjkkn7.fsf@gitster-ct.c.googlers.com>
Hi Junio,
On Fri, 30 Nov 2018, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Show 26 quoted lines
> Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes: > > >> I had to delay -rc2 to see these last minute tweaks come to some > >> reasonable place to stop at, and I do not think we want to delay the > >> final any longer or destablizing it further by piling last minute > >> undercooked changes on top. > > > > So how about doing this on top of 'master' instead? As this leaks > > *no* information wrt how range-diff machinery should behave from the > > format-patch side by not passing any diffopt, as long as the new > > code I added to show_range_diff() comes up with a reasonable default > > diffopts (for which I really would appreciate extra sets of eyes to > > make sure), this change by definition cannot be wrong (famous last > > words). > > As listed in today's "What's cooking" report, I've merged this to > 'next' in today's pushout and planning to have it in the -rc2. I am > not married to this exact implementation, and I'd welcome to have an > even simpler and less disruptive solution if exists, but I am hoping > that this is a good-enough interim measure for the upcoming release, > until we decide what to do with the customizability of range-diff > driven by format-patch. > > In addition to this, I am planning the "rebase --stat" and "reflog > that does not say 'rebase -i' but 'rebase'" fixes merged to 'master' > before cutting -rc2.
Thank you for integrating them. That way, we have an -rc2 with no issues in the built-in rebase/rebase -i that we know of.
Ciao, Dscho