From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2021 15:33:05 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 3/3] send-email docs: add format-patch options
Message-ID: <xmqqzgs2vvim.fsf@gitster.g>
In-Reply-To: <CAPUEspjxYy4GOABXkzRza-wmKnZAdq-v=OP-9+-wfV2PCnDGwQ@mail.gmail.com>

Carlo Arenas <carenas@gmail.com> writes:

> On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 9:36 PM Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 24/09/21 09.46, Thiago Perrotta wrote:
>> >   SYNOPSIS
>> >   --------
>> >   [verse]
>> > -'git send-email' [<options>] <file|directory|rev-list options>...
>> > +'git send-email' [<options>] <file|directory>...
>> > +'git send-email' [<options>] <format-patch options>
>> >   'git send-email' --dump-aliases
>>
>> Is <format-patch options> optional? If so, we can say [<format-patch
>> options>].
>
> no; as Junio explained [1] this omission is intentional while the
> rev-list options that
> got cut to make space are not and are more relevant.
>
> IMHO leaving [<options>] to imply ALL options (that also include diff
> options, for example) is better

Could you claify this idea a bit more?  Do you mean that the second form
can just be:

	git send-email <format-patch options>

That will exclude the send-email specific ones (like
"--in-reply-to=<msg>"), so it may not be a great idea.

Or do you mean

	git send-email <options>

and have the <options> placeholder to stand for both send-email
options and options meant for format-patch?

Thanks.