[RFC] Making format-patch output better when blank line is missing?

Adeodato Simó· Jan 17, 2009, 12:35 UTC · lore

Hello,

I'm using git-format-patch to send commit diff emails, and it was recently brought to my atention that if a commit message consists entirely in a paragraph with no blank lines (particluarly, no blank line after the first line, which is not a summary but just the first line of the paragraph), git-format-patch will place all the commit message in the Subject, which is inconvenient to read.

Do you think it would be good to have format-patch do something like this in this case?:

    Subject: [PATCH] This commit introduces a new function bla() that [...]

    [...] makes it possible to apply the frobniz operation to objects
    that don't bla bla bla bla.

(I realize that, with this, the applying logic would have to learn about it. Hm.)

-- 
Adeodato Simó                                     dato at net.com.org.es
Debian Developer                                  adeodato at debian.org
 
- I love you, Shirley, I'm not ashamed to say.
- If you love me, then you'll want me to be happy. Even if I'm not with you.
- I don't love you that much.
                -- Denny Crane and Shirley Schmidt

Jeff King· Jan 17, 2009, 15:47 UTC · re: Adeodato Simó · lore

Re: [RFC] Making format-patch output better when blank line is missing?

On Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 01:35:45PM +0100, Adeodato Simó wrote:

Show 6 quoted lines

> I'm using git-format-patch to send commit diff emails, and it was
> recently brought to my atention that if a commit message consists
> entirely in a paragraph with no blank lines (particluarly, no blank line
> after the first line, which is not a summary but just the first line of
> the paragraph), git-format-patch will place all the commit message in
> the Subject, which is inconvenient to read.

Yeah, such messages don't really interact well with the idea of a subject/body commit format.

Show 10 quoted lines

> Do you think it would be good to have format-patch do something like
> this in this case?:
> 
>     Subject: [PATCH] This commit introduces a new function bla() that [...]
> 
>     [...] makes it possible to apply the frobniz operation to objects
>     that don't bla bla bla bla.
> 
> (I realize that, with this, the applying logic would have to learn about
> it. Hm.)

I think it would be more readable to simply limit the subject line, add "...", and then repeat the whole paragraph in the body. Then worst case, the person applying just gets the text repeated, like:

  This commit introduces a new function bla() that...

  This commit introduces a new function bla() that makes it possible to
  aply the forbniz operation to objects that don't bla bla bla bla.

which is actually pretty reasonable. And best case, the person applying fixes it up appropriately. But I don't know if it is worth trying to come up with a reversible format. Patches sent through email are meant to preserve what's on the other end, but it doesn't _have_ to be exact, especially in the face of somebody ignoring the workflow conventions that the patch format is meant to support.

-Peff