On Thu, Oct 02, 2008 at 07:58:11PM +0200, Giuseppe Bilotta wrote: > format-patch is often used for multiple patches at once when sending a > patchset, in which case we want to number the patches; on the other > hand, single-patches are not usually expected to be numbered. > > The typical behavior expected by format-patch is therefore the one > obtained by enabling autonumber, which should thus be the default. I personally do not agree with this default. My usual use of format-patch is to dump a cluster of miscellaneous patches since "origin", and then grab the one(s) I want by title. However, I would not be surprised to find that my use is unlike that of most other people[1], so I am not opposed to the patch. [1] Actually, my use has a deficiency, which is that I am often sending 2/4, without nobody having seen 1/4, on which it might actually depend. This works in practice for me because I am often producing unrelated janitorial patches for git. :) So I think the goal is reasonable, but: > --- > builtin-log.c | 6 +++++- > 1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) Documentation update? -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
