[PATCH 1/1] looks a bit silly, and automagically handling

this in git-format-patch makes some scripting around it a

lot more pleasant.
Signed-off-by: Andreas Ericsson <ae@op5.se>

---

 Documentation/git-format-patch.txt |    3 ++-

 builtin-log.c                      |    4 ++++

 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/git-format-patch.txt b/Documentation/git-format-patch.txt

index c9857a2..9f16951 100644

--- a/Documentation/git-format-patch.txt

+++ b/Documentation/git-format-patch.txt

@@ -56,7 +56,8 @@ If -o is specified, output files are created in <dir>.  Otherwise

 they are created in the current working directory.
 If -n is specified, instead of "[PATCH] Subject", the first line

-is formatted as "[PATCH n/m] Subject".

+is formatted as "[PATCH n/m] Subject" if the revision range to

+format contains more than one commit.
 If given --thread, git-format-patch will generate In-Reply-To and

 References headers to make the second and subsequent patch mails appear

diff --git a/builtin-log.c b/builtin-log.c

index e8b982d..5c48f4d 100644

--- a/builtin-log.c

+++ b/builtin-log.c

@@ -642,6 +642,10 @@ int cmd_format_patch(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix)

 		list[nr - 1] = commit;

 	}

 	total = nr;

+

+	/* don't number patches when there's only one */

+	if (total == 1)

+		numbered = 0;

 	if (numbered)

 		rev.total = total + start_number - 1;

 	rev.add_signoff = add_signoff;

--

1.5.3.4.1273.g725c19
-

Hi,
I think you should not use "-n" if you do not want to have the numbers.

In circumstances as yours, where you can have patch series larger than

one, I imagine that the "[PATCH 1/1]" bears an important information,

which is not present in "[PATCH]": this patch series contains only one

patch.
IOW I do not like your patch: too much DWIDNS (Do What I Did NOT Say) for

me.
Ciao,

Dscho
-

Automagically enable numbering if we output more than one patch.
Signed-off-by: Mike Hommey <mh@glandium.org>

---
How about the contrary ?
 Documentation/git-format-patch.txt |    3 ++-

 builtin-log.c                      |    2 ++

 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/git-format-patch.txt b/Documentation/git-format-patch.txt

index f0617ef..b77daed 100644

--- a/Documentation/git-format-patch.txt

+++ b/Documentation/git-format-patch.txt

@@ -56,7 +56,8 @@ If -o is specified, output files are created in <dir>.  Otherwise

 they are created in the current working directory.
 If -n is specified, instead of "[PATCH] Subject", the first line

-is formatted as "[PATCH n/m] Subject".

+is formatted as "[PATCH n/m] Subject". This is the default when

+there is more than one commit to prepare patches for.
 If given --thread, git-format-patch will generate In-Reply-To and

 References headers to make the second and subsequent patch mails appear

diff --git a/builtin-log.c b/builtin-log.c

index 8b2bf63..640d6e7 100644

--- a/builtin-log.c

+++ b/builtin-log.c

@@ -642,6 +642,8 @@ int cmd_format_patch(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix)

 		list[nr - 1] = commit;

 	}

 	total = nr;

+	if (!keep_subject && total > 1)

+		numbered = 1;

 	if (numbered)

 		rev.total = total + start_number - 1;

 	rev.add_signoff = add_signoff;

--

1.5.3.5
-

Hi,
Still DWIDNSAA.
Ciao,

Dscho
-

Every piece of DWIM can be translated as "do what I didn't say". If you had to

say it, it wouldn't be DWIM after all.
--

Andreas Ericsson                   andreas.ericsson@op5.se

OP5 AB                             www.op5.se

Tel: +46 8-230225                  Fax: +46 8-230231

-

Hi,
At some point, though, it becomes a "Do what _I_ (and nobody else does, or

at least what a substantial part of the rest of the world did not) mean",

and that point is reached here and now.
Wow.  I did not think I had to explain _that_.
Ciao,

Dscho
-

Every piece of dwimmery is suggested by someone and usually backed by a few,

so it's likely wanted by many. Your ultra-conserative "works for *me*, so

shut up and stop trying to change things" means git really has to be flawless.

For you, that is. For others, there are still things to improve. I'd

appreciate if you could losen the "MY playpen" a little though, as it takes
Dito.
--

Andreas Ericsson                   andreas.ericsson@op5.se

OP5 AB                             www.op5.se

Tel: +46 8-230225                  Fax: +46 8-230231

-

Works for me. How does one turn it off?
--

Andreas Ericsson                   andreas.ericsson@op5.se

OP5 AB                             www.op5.se

Tel: +46 8-230225                  Fax: +46 8-230231

-

Does it make sense to turn it off ?
Mike

-

Sometimes, yes. I frequently gather several small fixes on a branch and then

send all of them at once. They rarely depend on each other, and apply order

is usually not important, so it doesn't make sense to order them.
--

Andreas Ericsson                   andreas.ericsson@op5.se

OP5 AB                             www.op5.se

Tel: +46 8-230225                  Fax: +46 8-230231

-

This stems from creating scripts around it where I only want to see the

numbers if there is more than a single patch. Currently I can't do that

without running git-format-patch twice or re-implementing the revision

parsing machinery to count revisions prior to passing arguments to 
That's sort of implicit in [PATCH], since all patch-series added by the

tool I'm scripting will have [PATCH n/m], while I'd prefer for 
Would a separate option be acceptable to you?
It doesn't have to be fancy or short, since I really only mean to use it

from our scripts.
--

Andreas Ericsson                   andreas.ericsson@op5.se

OP5 AB                             www.op5.se

Tel: +46 8-230225                  Fax: +46 8-230231

-

Hi,
Why not have something as simple as
	numbered=

	test $(git rev-list $options | wc -l) -gt 1 && numbered=-n
	[...]
	git format-patch $numbered $options
At the moment, the semantics of "--numbered" is really clear and precise.

And I really like that.  It makes for less surprises.
Ciao,

Dscho
-

Because 23498~12 != 23498~12..HEAD to git rev-list, but it is to

git-format-patch, meaning I'll have to duplicate the logic in every

script that's supposed to use it or risk introducing a third way of 
Semantics could be equally clear for --numbered-if-multiple.
--

Andreas Ericsson                   andreas.ericsson@op5.se

OP5 AB                             www.op5.se

Tel: +46 8-230225                  Fax: +46 8-230231

-