Hi Jonathan and Junio, Junio C Hamano writes: > I am not very impressed by the counting. It probably makes more sense to > count only what we are actually going to process and emit, i.e. always use > no-merges (do we even support format-patch on a merge?). Frankly, I think the patch looks like an ugly hack myself. No, format-patch doesn't support merge commits at all. Jonathan Nieder writes: > Ramkumar Ramachandra wrote: > > Ramkumar Ramachandra writes: > > >> The second patch clarifies the meaning of the `-<n>` option. We should > >> also probably force the mutual exclusivity of `-<n>` and <revision > >> range> to avoid confusion. > [...] > > Do you see value in this patch or is it just unnecessary baggage? > > I see value in avoiding confusion. Maybe one solution would be to make > format-patch use --no-merges by default. Good idea. I'll write a patch. Do we also want people to be able to turn off `--no-merges`? If so, how? -- Ram -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html