Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> This change doesn't update git-format-patch with a --no-patch
> option. That can be added later similar to how format-patch first
> learned --range-diff, and then --creation-factor in
> 8631bf1cdd ("format-patch: add --creation-factor tweak for
> --range-diff", 2018-07-22). I don't see why anyone would want this for
> format-patch, it pretty much defeats the point of range-diff.
I am OK not to have this option integrated to format-patch from day
one, but I do not think it is a good idea to hint that it should not
be done later.
Does it defeats the point of range-diff to omit the patch part in
the context of the cover letter? How?
I think the output with this option is a good addition to the cover
letter as an abbreviated form (as opposed to the full range-diff,
whose support was added earlier) that gives an overview.
Calling this --[no-]patch might make it harder to integrate it to
format-patch later, though. I suspect that people would expect
"format-patch --no-patch ..." to omit both the patch part of the
range-diff output *AND* the patch that should be applied to the
codebase (it of course would defeat the point of format-patch, so
today's format-patch would not pay attention to --no-patch, of
course). We need to be careful not to break that when it happens.
