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? > Thanks, > Jonathan -- 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