Hi Junio, On Wed, 29 Aug 2018, Junio C Hamano wrote: > * es/format-patch-interdiff (2018-07-23) 6 commits > - format-patch: allow --interdiff to apply to a lone-patch > - log-tree: show_log: make commentary block delimiting reusable > - interdiff: teach show_interdiff() to indent interdiff > - format-patch: teach --interdiff to respect -v/--reroll-count > - format-patch: add --interdiff option to embed diff in cover letter > - format-patch: allow additional generated content in make_cover_letter() > (this branch is used by es/format-patch-rangediff.) > > "git format-patch" learned a new "--interdiff" option to explain > the difference between this version and the previous atttempt in > the cover letter (or after the tree-dashes as a comment). > > What's the doneness of this one? > cf. <CAPig+cSuYUYSPTuKx08wcmQM-G12_-W2T4BS07fA=6grM1b8Gw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> I looked over the changes online, and I think they are good. The only slightly iffy thing I found was using the function parameter `rerolled` as printf-style format in https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git/compare/es/format-patch-interdiff~6...es/format-patch-interdiff#diff-71d4a6bddc3e479f9abf11900878a0b2R1430: static const char *diff_title(struct strbuf *sb, int reroll_count, const char *generic, const char *rerolled) { if (reroll_count <= 0) strbuf_addstr(sb, generic); else /* RFC may be v0, so allow -v1 to diff against v0 */ strbuf_addf(sb, rerolled, reroll_count - 1); return sb->buf; } I guess that's okay, though. (I would have done it differently, but that would have meant playing sentence lego with the "Interdiff against v%d:" string.) > * es/format-patch-rangediff (2018-08-14) 10 commits > - format-patch: allow --range-diff to apply to a lone-patch > - format-patch: add --creation-factor tweak for --range-diff > - format-patch: teach --range-diff to respect -v/--reroll-count > - format-patch: extend --range-diff to accept revision range > - format-patch: add --range-diff option to embed diff in cover letter > - range-diff: relieve callers of low-level configuration burden > - range-diff: publish default creation factor > - range-diff: respect diff_option.file rather than assuming 'stdout' > - Merge branch 'es/format-patch-interdiff' into es/format-patch-rangediff > - Merge branch 'js/range-diff' into es/format-patch-rangediff > (this branch uses es/format-patch-interdiff.) > > "git format-patch" learned a new "--range-diff" option to explain > the difference between this version and the previous atttempt in > the cover letter (or after the tree-dashes as a comment). > > What's the doneness of this one? I just had a look at the diff online, and I think this is ready for next. Personally, I would have put the infer_range_diff_ranges() function (https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git/compare/es/format-patch-rangediff~8...es/format-patch-rangediff#diff-71d4a6bddc3e479f9abf11900878a0b2R1448) into `range-diff.c`, but it is too minor a thing to ask for a new patch series iteration. It also looks slightly murky to me that `show_range_diff()` is now using a copy of the `diffopts` (see https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git/compare/es/format-patch-rangediff~8...es/format-patch-rangediff#diff-ab6f5eca48b8e84edf999acbe3fe7553R435), but I have no idea how to do this in a more elegant manner, either. In short: from my point of view, both topics are ready for `next`. Ciao, Dscho
