On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 05:06:17PM -0400, Jeff King wrote: > > the project's convention what to do with it. The side branch the patch > > was developed on may be named "quick-hack", which would not have any > > relevance to the final location of where that patch wants to be in. > > I suspect you would do better to look at branch.quick-hack.merge, so > that you say "this was based on upstream's X", not "this is my > quick-hack". > > But there are so many ways this could go wrong, since the patches you're > formatting might not even have anything to do with the branch you're on. Side note: if you have a particular workflow, it might make sense, rather than using format-patch directly, to codify that workflow in another script which says "ok, this is how I grab a branch and send it upstream". And in that case, you could look up "here's where I branched from" and feed it into the patch via format-patch's --subject-prefix option. -Peff -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
