Nathan Collins <nathan.coll...@gmail.com> writes: > Hmmm. Maybe a warning that the patch is expected to be in '-p1' > format, and that setting 'diff.noprefix=true' makes some commands > generate '-p0' patches?
"some"? Do you have exceptions in mind? > But I worry this would just confuse / distract > the people that don't have 'diff.noprefix=true' set, Probably. But that would suggest that the place to improve the doc is for diff.noprefix configuration variable, no? > Better I think would be for 'git apply' to be > smarter, as you suggest below. As it is a plumbing command behind "add -p", "am", and friends, I would hate to see "git apply" pretend to be smarter than its users. When the user tells it to use -p0, it shouldn't guess, and when the user tells it to use -p1 by not giving any -p$n, it shouldn't guess. As long as we make it clear "git apply" without any explicit -p$n means the user is telling it to do -p1 in its documentation, I think it would be fine. >> I personally think setting diff.noprefix is not very sane (it also >> breaks "patch -p1"), and I suppose I should have been louder about >> that when it was introduced. I share the same feeling ;-) But the boat has sailed, so the best we could do is to warn in its doc (i.e. where diff.noprefix is described) about its pitfalls. -- 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
