Denton Liu <liu.denton@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > Hmm, others may disagree but I don't really like the idea of > `--previous-count`. It may be useful for populating "Range-diff vs <n>" > instead of just "Range-diff" but I don't think it's worth the cost of > maintaining this option. It really depends on the target audience. As a reviewer who may be too busy to read every iteration of a series, I would probably find it useless if it gives just "range-diff" or "range-diff with last" without saying which exact round. Obviously, if you are not doing range-diff, it will not be an issue. If the patch requires (I didn't read the latest one) the previous-count to be given when range-diff or interdiff is not requested, it should probably be fixed. I am also OK with any design decision, as long as it will not close the door for the occasionally requested feature to carry over cover letter material from the previous round to the current one. Thanks.
