"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>> Not needed with recent "git format-patch -v4" option.
>
> Unless I rerun with same vX :(
> Would it make sense for it to check for vX existance and fail?
> Same without -vX, when 000X exists ...
> Could be an option.
Oh, instead of exact -v$N, trigger it with "-v auto" or something?
Sounds like a good addition.
And instead of ***BLURBHERE*** placeholder, text from old round
could be copied as a new placeholder. I do not offhand think that
needs much thought about compatibility but maybe there are people
who trained their editors or scripts to find the known placeholder
string and edit it? I dunno. It certainly sounds like a sensible
thing to do to carry as much information forward from the older
round if/when we know which one corresponds to which.
Discussions and patches welcome.
>> > git branch|fgrep '*'
>> > # Figure out on which branch I am, manually specify the correct upstream I'm tracking,
>> > # otherwise I get a ton of unrelated patches.
>>
>> git-prompt with PS1 you do not need this either.
>
> grep serves just as well but
> I still need to copy it to the next line manually...
>
> I vaguely remember there was some way to say
> "head of the remote I am tracking" - but I could not find it.
Do you mean @{upstream}?
> Where are all the tricks like foo^{} documented?
Documentation/revisions.txt?
> Additionally, or alternatively, would it make sense for git format-patch
> to format the diff against the tracking branch by default?
Meaning "git format-patch @{u}" without saying anything about @{u}?
I am not sure if we want to go that far, but it certainly is worth a
thought.
--
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