From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com (pb-smtp1.pobox.com [64.147.108.70]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0504015ECFA for ; Wed, 24 Apr 2024 15:25:45 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=64.147.108.70 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1713972347; cv=none; b=lzdlt5ygTl7zhxMzQo8RRFTp5DPs+8pge7+z8dN9ZwFjreDfHBcu4vv7pcrDsR2lSJvM8NDMxalBty0dGW3pMgMkOKyP9eEUjNdsruvaGnY0Ky94y/MsC+FDY5NCXRCPYXu5jMJQNV4iy2lm6c+V0ppfZ3bHJJCbYfYTkQ6TosM= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1713972347; c=relaxed/simple; bh=qKqoJFePLK+GVgFHVVfupoLPNSDzWZa8vrnJHqlCIJ0=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=DIT+J6SznoDNbey9zAymNR8zymadHNSw/mS75y8YcE3U6uOU6RdplGzZ6R/d/FXqD0vz3xEUyXG+70yANEqlug/GUlr26wjLR2RQd2JIF8kcFpw9/vrn7DUXxRL4EwN2wFQ1aTBohmqReZjN4jvzJyujIixCecEK1RNS2H9NhVs= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=pobox.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pobox.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b=eOLXojDf; arc=none smtp.client-ip=64.147.108.70 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=pobox.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pobox.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b="eOLXojDf" Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D48B1FEB5; Wed, 24 Apr 2024 11:25:44 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=qKqoJFePLK+GVgFHVVfupoLPNSDzWZa8vrnJHq lCIJ0=; b=eOLXojDf7Ei2Qz5sKGU/86knkGCCcoePBJuo6DowNn74I/cYELdAbS KQOeXN0r54Vdopr8KfUbleeMhYI5ADwybwto54tX2tFfdZGSOMt6gcTZFGRk3b61 sgkPVwVnt27QUusVX1sfuDwDyKbYafH5OStmsBWNupKhOFKhyhH1s= Received: from pb-smtp1.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 85B1D1FEB4; Wed, 24 Apr 2024 11:25:44 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.125.120.109]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B4C121FEB3; Wed, 24 Apr 2024 11:25:43 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Phillip Wood Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Dragan Simic Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] format-patch: "--rfc=-(WIP)" appends to produce [PATCH (WIP)] In-Reply-To: (Phillip Wood's message of "Wed, 24 Apr 2024 11:16:08 +0100") References: <20240421185915.1031590-1-gitster@pobox.com> <20240423175234.170434-1-gitster@pobox.com> <20240423175234.170434-3-gitster@pobox.com> Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2024 08:25:42 -0700 Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: EA8D1FB8-024E-11EF-95B7-78DCEB2EC81B-77302942!pb-smtp1.pobox.com Phillip Wood writes: > I'm not convinced this is a good idea as I'm not sure how adding "RFC" > at the end of the subject prefix makes the world better than just > having at the start of the prefix and I find using "-" to do that > quite confusing. I am not convinced it is a good idea, either. "PATCH (WIP)" was the best example I could come up with. I am also a fan of "a list of space separated labels or keywords" you mentioned, but *if* a project convention somewhere is to have them before "PATCH", then it is not entirely unreasonable to wish to have a way to prepend these labels. But I am fine to drop it for the sake of simplicity. It would help discourage users from trying to be "original" in a way that does not make a material difference. If a project comes with a concrete need to prepend, the patch is always resurrectable from the list archive. As to the syntax, I think "-" is a fairly good way to indicate whether it goes to the front or back. When told to "Combine '-RFC' and 'PATCH'", I expect that most people would give 'PATCH-RFC' and not '-RFC PATCH'. Thanks.