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

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Apr 19, 2024, 02:13 UTC
Message-ID: <xmqqedb2nlpf.fsf@gitster.g>
In-Reply-To: <CAPig+cT9A9N=zGZDXuB+c17L8hZ-h5zvZgD5W-8VYqiM9QaBew@mail.gmail.com>

Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com> writes:

Show 8 quoted lines

> I do understand and am sympathetic to the desire to reduce the typing
> load (hence, the original `--resend` proposal), but I have difficulty
> believing that `git format-patch` is so commonly used throughout the
> day that the time saved by typing `--resend` over
> `--subject-prefix="RESEND PATCH"` warrants the extra implementation,
> documentation, and testing baggage. Likewise, I don't see the value in
> `--label=WIP` (or `--rfc=WIP` or whatever) over the existing more
> general `--subject-prefix`.

I am not interested in adding unbounded number of --wip and the like at all, but the value you seem to be missing of the separate "--rfc" is that there are folks who configure something other than "PATCH" to "format.subjectPrefix". They do not want to keep typing --subject-prefix="PATCH net-next" on the command line, so they use the configuration variable, which is "set it once and forget". The stress is on the fact that they can forget about it.

If they are told to say --subject-prefix="RFC PATCH net-next" when they want to send an RFC patch as one-shot basis, they would not be happy. That is where the value of a command line "--rfc" for a particular invocation is---they don't have to remember or care that their normal subject prefix is "PATCH net-next", which is required if you forced them to use --subject-prefix.