# Dubious format-patch options 5 messages from 2008-06-13 to 2008-06-13. Participants: Jon Loeliger, Junio C Hamano, Linus Torvalds, Jeff King. Thread: https://gitlist.dev/t/13926 ## Jon Loeliger, 2008-06-13 01:14 Subject: Dubious format-patch options Message-ID: URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/E1K6xrt-00033S-2J%40jdl.com ``` Git-ites, Hmmm... There are a ton of dubious options being accepted by the "git format-patch" command due to it being a skinny front to "git log". Like, the -S and pick-axe crew: Yeah, this is context-less, but my point is that we get totally different behavior from the -S"string" here: $ git log -SC alt~1..HEAD commit bca87c386c8868664e64d397108b8e6deda1e574 Author: Jon Loeliger Date: Thu Jun 12 17:57:57 2008 -0500 C versus $ git format-patch -SC alt~1..HEAD 0001-C.patch 0002-D.patch 0003-Z.patch 0004-F.patch Oh yeah. And --color is a cool thing too. I mean, I was pleasantly pleased with: $ git format-patch -1 --stdout --color master But I seriously doubt that we _really_ want to send a patch that has the embedded escape sequences in it: From: Jon Loeliger Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2008 18:13:10 -0500 Subject: [PATCH] F --- fileESC[m | 1 ESC[32m+ESC[m 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)ESC[m ESC[1mdiff --git a/file b/fileESC[m ESC[1mindex 6ac15b9..65f21da 100644ESC[m ESC[1m--- a/fileESC[m ESC[1m+++ b/fileESC[m ESC[36m@@ -5,3 +5,4 @@ D ESC[m X ESC[m Y ESC[m Z ESC[mESC[32m+ESC[mESC[32mFESC[m -- 1.5.6.rc0.46.gd2b3 Oh yeah. Another Vodka Tonic please while git-send-email that... jdl ``` ## Junio C Hamano, 2008-06-13 02:05 Subject: Re: Dubious format-patch options Message-ID: <7vzlpqxf6y.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/7vzlpqxf6y.fsf%40gitster.siamese.dyndns.org In-Reply-To: ``` Jon Loeliger writes: > Git-ites, > > Hmmm... There are a ton of dubious options being accepted > by the "git format-patch" command due to it being a skinny > front to "git log". Like, the -S and pick-axe crew: > ... > Oh yeah. > > And --color is a cool thing too. I mean, I was pleasantly > pleased with: Amusing ;-). ``` ## Linus Torvalds, 2008-06-13 02:24 Subject: Re: Dubious format-patch options Message-ID: URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/alpine.LFD.1.10.0806121923400.2949%40woody.linux-foundation.org In-Reply-To: ``` On Thu, 12 Jun 2008, Jon Loeliger wrote: > > $ git format-patch -1 --stdout --color master > > But I seriously doubt that we _really_ want to send a > patch that has the embedded escape sequences in it: Hey, you asked for it, you got it. I hope you're not complaining. Linus ``` ## Junio C Hamano, 2008-06-13 03:01 Subject: Re: Dubious format-patch options Message-ID: <7vtzfyxckm.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/7vtzfyxckm.fsf%40gitster.siamese.dyndns.org In-Reply-To: ``` Linus Torvalds writes: > On Thu, 12 Jun 2008, Jon Loeliger wrote: >> >> $ git format-patch -1 --stdout --color master >> >> But I seriously doubt that we _really_ want to send a >> patch that has the embedded escape sequences in it: > > Hey, you asked for it, you got it. I hope you're not complaining. Well, having said and heard all that, coming back to our more serious selves... I think being able to do $ git -p format-patch --stdout --color -2 HEAD makes some sense. Being able to produce an unusable patch by saying $ git format-patch --stat old.. at the first glance is of quite dubious value, but even that would make sense as a good input source for "commit log automailer". I think I know where Jon is coming from and where he wants to go. While I am somewhat sympathetic to the cause of adding some warning or safety valve to prevent nonsense option combinations from being given, I am not sure we can draw a line to classify options into black and white. ``` ## Jeff King, 2008-06-13 06:33 Subject: Re: Dubious format-patch options Message-ID: <20080613063337.GE26768@sigill.intra.peff.net> URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/20080613063337.GE26768%40sigill.intra.peff.net In-Reply-To: <7vtzfyxckm.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> ``` On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 08:01:45PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > makes some sense. Being able to produce an unusable patch by saying > > $ git format-patch --stat old.. > > at the first glance is of quite dubious value, but even that would make > sense as a good input source for "commit log automailer". > > I think I know where Jon is coming from and where he wants to go. While I > am somewhat sympathetic to the cause of adding some warning or safety > valve to prevent nonsense option combinations from being given, I am not > sure we can draw a line to classify options into black and white. I am against a safety valve here. For example, I have the following alias: format-patch --pretty=format:%s%n%n%b which obviously does not generate a valid email, but which I use for pulling "how about this?" patches directly into existing emails (otherwise, I have to delete the header cruft myself). Yes, I _could_ do this with git-log, but format-patch has slightly different command line semantics. And it most clearly expresses what I want: the patch submission format, but with the header bits pretty-printed differently. My point being that this flexibility _is_ useful, and I am not sure it is worth removing it in favor of people who get confused about why git format-patch --pretty=format:%s%n%n%b origin | git send-email doesn't work. -Peff ```