On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 11:46:51AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Jeff King p...@peff.net writes:
If it were just --signature, I'd agree. After all, nobody is even
complaining. But this is also in preparation for --signature-file.
Should the user create a file without a trailing newline?
On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 09:55:43AM -0700, Jeremiah Mahler wrote:
I am fine with including your previous patch.
I think that would be my preference, but we'll see what Junio says.
Would like me to test it out and create another patch set?
Yeah, that would be the logical next step. I think the
Jeff King p...@peff.net writes:
On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 11:46:51AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Jeff King p...@peff.net writes:
If it were just --signature, I'd agree. After all, nobody is even
complaining. But this is also in preparation for --signature-file.
Should the user create a
On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 10:37:05AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
I wasn't planning on anything as drastic as stripspace. I really just
wanted to suppress the one newline, which is almost certainly the right
thing to include for --signature, but the wrong thing for
--signature-file (i.e.,
Jeff King p...@peff.net writes:
On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 10:37:05AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
I wasn't planning on anything as drastic as stripspace. I really just
wanted to suppress the one newline, which is almost certainly the right
thing to include for --signature, but the wrong
On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 11:26:18AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Yeah, I agree with the last sentence. My mention of cleansing
took into account your do we want to omit the leading blank as
well? as well. In any case, wouldn't reusing stripspace() make the
fix-up shorter?
Not really. Doing
On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 04:47:39PM -0400, Jeff King wrote:
On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 11:26:18AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
...
I think the ratio of usefulness to number of words in this sub-thread is
getting off. I'd be OK with any of:
...
-Peff
I think this has become a discussion about
Added option that allows a signature file to be used with format-patch
so that signatures with newlines and other special characters can be
easily included.
$ git format-patch --signature-file ~/.signature -1
The config variable format.signaturefile is also provided so that it
can be added by
v5 of patch to add format-patch --signature-file file option.
This revision includes more suggestions from Jeff King and Junio C Hamano:
- Use git_config_pathname instead of git_config_string for ~ expansion.
- Eliminated head/tail --lines which is not POSIX compliant.
Replaced with sed
On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 01:00:06AM -0700, Jeremiah Mahler wrote:
Added option that allows a signature file to be used with format-patch
so that signatures with newlines and other special characters can be
easily included.
$ git format-patch --signature-file ~/.signature -1
The config
Jeff King p...@peff.net writes:
But one could easily specify a longer, multi-line signature,
like:
git format-patch --signature='
this is my long signature
it has multiple lines
' ...
We should notice that it already has its own trailing
newline, and suppress one of ours.
On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 10:53:11AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
I actually think these supress extra LFs trying to be overly smart
and inviting unnecessary surprises. Unlike log messages people type
(in which we do squash runs of blank lines and other prettifying),
mail-signature string is
Jeff King p...@peff.net writes:
If it were just --signature, I'd agree. After all, nobody is even
complaining. But this is also in preparation for --signature-file.
Should the user create a file without a trailing newline?
Ahh, I missed that part.
I am fine with processing it with
On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 04:27:40AM -0400, Jeff King wrote:
On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 01:00:06AM -0700, Jeremiah Mahler wrote:
...
+test_expect_success 'format-patch --signature-file=file' '
+ git format-patch --stdout --signature-file=expect -1 output
+ check_patch output
+ sed -n
14 matches
Mail list logo
