On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 12:21:13PM +0300, Nikolaj Shurkaev wrote: > I'll propose to put something like this into git documentation > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > diff --git a/Documentation/git-format-patch.txt > b/Documentation/git-format-patch.txt > index 6ea9be7..63267c6 100644 > --- a/Documentation/git-format-patch.txt > +++ b/Documentation/git-format-patch.txt > @@ -23,6 +23,7 @@ SYNOPSIS > [--cover-letter] [--quiet] > [<common diff options>] > [ <since> | <revision range> ] > + [[\--] <path>...] > > DESCRIPTION > ----------- > @@ -219,6 +220,12 @@ you can use `--suffix=-patch` to get > `0001-description-of-my-change-patch`. > range are always formatted as creation patches, independently > of this flag. > > +[\--] <path>...:: > + Put in patches only those modifications that affect specified files > + and folders. It's important to understand that log message of the > + commit may become inappropriate because some parts of patch may be > + cut off. > + I think that text looks OK. But to my mind, it is not that format-patch accepts a path parameter, but rather that it takes arbitrary log-like arguments. So you could do "git format-patch --grep=whatever", or even something like "git format-patch --cherry". I don't know how well tested every option is, though, so maybe it's not a good idea to encourage the use of random options. -Peff -- 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