Eric Sunshine <sunshine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Tue, Dec 3, 2019 at 11:45 PM Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: >> > My flow looks like this: >> > 2. vi <dir>/v<n-1>-0000-cover-letter.patch <dir>/v<n>-0000-cover-letter.patch >> > copy subject and blurb, avoiding patchset stats >> > 3. add changelog update blurb as appropriate >> > >> > The following perl script automates step 2 above. >> >> Neat. I wonder, should "git format-patch" learn an option for this? >> git format-patch -v<n> --cover-letter \ >> --last-cover-letter=<dir>/v<n-1>-0000-cover-letter.patch \ >> -o <dir> > > That was my first thought, as well, although, as this has similar > purpose to the new git-format-patch --cover-from-description= option, > perhaps a more suitable name might be --copy-cover-from= or something? > > I could even imagine a new option -V<n> which has the combined effect > of setting the re-roll count (like -v) and automagically copying the > cover letter material from cover letter v<n-1> located in <dir>. I actually looked into doing something similar but without any new option (i.e. unconditionally --cover-letter with -v<n> would check for v<n-1>-0000-cover.letter and does the right thing) some time ago. I do not recall why I gave up (not that I tried very hard), but IIRC, the current reroll-count was not passed down in the callchain to make_cover_letter() to do this. But I think that was even before we integrated the range-diff stuff, which does seem to use the "given we are doing <n>, let's compare with <n-1>" thing, so perhaps it is not too difficult. I am just saying that I think the change would not have to be opt-in, but can be unconditionally made, simply because replacing the BLURB HERE placeholder with *anything* written by human user previously is a 100% improvement ;-) Thanks.
