Eric Sunshine <sunshine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> Placement of the range-diff in the cover-letter was a deliberate choice[1].
OK, and the reasoning in [1] still makes sense. Short-and-sweet
stuff with denser information contents first, before a bulky "diff
of diff" we add as an auxiliary piece of information.
> Regarding your experiment[2] to place the range-diff at the end of a
> single-patch, apparently that idea had been considered, as well, but
> it was noted[3,4] that, by default, some MUIs hide everything after
> the "--" line.
That is different from what [3] noted, though. It was "the stuff
after '-- ' not included in a reply/reply-all when responding".
(1) As we'd rather want to see the actual patch, not a part of
range-diff in the cover letter, responded, placing it under the
"-- " mark and excluded from the response is actually a
feature.
(2) If we wanted to, we can show the log message, "---", output of
"git diff --stat -p", output of "git range-diff" and finally
the "-- " signature mark. Receiving end will not mistake the
range-diff output as part of the last hunk of the last patch.
So, I do not see it as a reason to refrain from placing the range
diff output after the main patch.
Thanks.
