On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 10:33:25AM -0700, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > Documentation/git-patch-id.txt | 23 ++++++++++++++++++-----
> > 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> Ah, there's the documentation. Please squash this with the patch that
> introduces the new behavior so they can be reviewed together more
> easily (both now and later when people do archeology).
> > +--stable::
> > + Use a symmetrical sum of hashes as the patch ID.
> > + With this option, reordering file diffs that make up a patch or
> > + splitting a diff up to multiple diffs that touch the same path
> > + does not affect the ID.
> > + This is the default if patchid.stable is set to true.
> This doesn't explain to me why I would want to use --stable versus
> --unstable. Maybe an EXAMPLES section would help?
> The only reason I can think of to use --unstable is for compatibility
> with historical patch-ids. Is there any other reason?
> At this point in the series there is no patchid.stable configuration.
> > +--unstable::
> > + Use a non-symmetrical sum of hashes, such that reordering
> What is a non-symmetrical sum?
Non-symmetrical combination function is better?
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html