Josh Triplett <j...@joshtriplett.org> writes: > This provides a shorter and more convenient alias for > --subject-prefix='RFC PATCH'.
Shorter and more convenient is quite subjective but more important as a justification is that we believe [RFC PATCH] is used fairly commonly (at least in certain circles). > Includes documentation in the format-patch manpage, and a new test > covering --rfc. We can see that from diffstat ;-) I'd retitle this like so: format-patch: add "--rfc" for the common case of [RFC PATCH] Add an alias for --subject-prefix='RFC PATCH', which is used commonly in some development communities to deserve such a short-hand. Signed-off-by: Josh Triplett <j...@joshtriplett.org> Reviewed-by: Jeff King <p...@peff.net> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com> > diff --git a/Documentation/git-format-patch.txt > b/Documentation/git-format-patch.txt > index 9624c84..9b200b3 100644 > --- a/Documentation/git-format-patch.txt > +++ b/Documentation/git-format-patch.txt > @@ -19,7 +19,8 @@ SYNOPSIS > [--start-number <n>] [--numbered-files] > [--in-reply-to=Message-Id] [--suffix=.<sfx>] > [--ignore-if-in-upstream] > - [--subject-prefix=Subject-Prefix] [(--reroll-count|-v) <n>] > + [--rfc] [--subject-prefix=Subject-Prefix] > + [(--reroll-count|-v) <n>] > [--to=<email>] [--cc=<email>] > [--[no-]cover-letter] [--quiet] [--notes[=<ref>]] > [<common diff options>] > @@ -172,6 +173,11 @@ will want to ensure that threading is disabled for `git > send-email`. > allows for useful naming of a patch series, and can be > combined with the `--numbered` option. > > +--rfc:: > + Alias for `--subject-prefix="RFC PATCH"`. RFC means "Request For > + Comments"; use this when sending an experimental patch for > + discussion rather than application. > + I do not think we want to be in the business of encouragign or discouraging the use of "[RFC PATCH]". --rfc:: A short-hand for `--subject-prefix="RFC PATCH"`. RFC stands for "request for comments" and such a prefix is used in some development communities when sending a patch primarily to illustrate an idea to help discussion, rather than to be applied. perhaps? The code and test both look good to me. Thanks.