Hi Junio
On 18/04/2024 23:54, Junio C Hamano wrote:
With the "--rfc" option, we can tweak the "[PATCH]" (or whatever
string specified with the "--subject-prefix" option, instead of
"PATCH") that we prefix the title of the commit with into "[RFC
PATCH]", but some projects may want "[rfc PATCH]". Adding a new
option, e.g., "--rfc-lowercase", to support such need every time
somebody wants to use different strings would lead to insanity of
accumulating unbounded number of such options.
Allow an optional value specified for the option, so that users can
use "--rfc=rfc" (think of "--rfc" without value as a short-hand for
"--rfc=RFC").
This can of course be (ab)used to make the prefix "[WIP PATCH]" by
passing "--rfc=WIP".
I think being able to customize the subject prefix in this way is a good
idea and makes it easy to say [RESEND PATCH program] with --rfc=RESEND
when format.subjectPrefix is set. We could add a separate option to as
"--rfc" already exists I think it is reasonable to extend it. (I'm also
not a good name for such an option would be "--subject-prefix-prefix"
kind of describes what it does but is far from ideal)
- [--rfc] [--subject-prefix=<subject-prefix>]
+ [--rfc[=<rfc>]] [--subject-prefix=<subject-prefix>]
Nit: in the documentation we use "<rfc>" for the placeholder but in the
code we use "<extra>"
---rfc::
- Prepends "RFC" to the subject prefix (producing "RFC PATCH" by
- default). RFC means "Request For Comments"; use this when sending
- an experimental patch for discussion rather than application.
+--rfc[=<rfc>]::
+ Prepends the string _<rfc>_ (defaults to "RFC") to
+ the subject prefix. As the subject prefix defaults to
+ "PATCH", you'll get "RFC PATCH" by default.
++
+RFC means "Request For Comments"; use this when sending
+an experimental patch for discussion rather than application.
+"--rfc=WIP" may also be a useful way to indicate that a patch
+is not complete yet.
This reworded description is good
const struct option builtin_format_patch_options[] = {
OPT_CALLBACK_F('n', "numbered", &numbered, NULL,
@@ -1932,7 +1944,9 @@ int cmd_format_patch(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix)
N_("mark the series as Nth re-roll")),
OPT_INTEGER(0, "filename-max-length", &fmt_patch_name_max,
N_("max length of output filename")),
- OPT_BOOL(0, "rfc", &rfc, N_("use [RFC PATCH] instead of [PATCH]")),
+ OPT_CALLBACK_F(0, "rfc", &rfc, N_("extra"),
+ N_("add <extra> (default 'RFC') before 'PATCH'"),
+ PARSE_OPT_NONEG|PARSE_OPT_OPTARG, rfc_callback),
This is a change in behavior as it looks like we previously accepted
"--no-rfc" is that deliberate?
Best Wishes
Phillip
