Re: [PATCH 0/2] log/ format-patch improvements

Ramkumar Ramachandra [off-list ref] writes:

Ramkumar Ramachandra writes:

quoted

The first patch implements Jakub's suggestion. Arguably, it's slightly
complicated- it took me more than a few minutes to do the math with
`nr` and `nr_i`.

The second patch clarifies the meaning of the `-<n>` option. We should
also probably force the mutual exclusivity of `-<n>` and <revision
range> to avoid confusion.

Additionally, thanks to Thomas for drilling into me the fundamental
difference between -<n> and a revision range (on IRC).

Ramkumar Ramachandra (2):
  git-format-patch: Print a diagnostic message when ignoring commits
  log: Improve description of '-<n>' option in documentation

 Documentation/git-format-patch.txt |    2 +-
 Documentation/git-log.txt          |    2 +-
 builtin/log.c                      |   42 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------
 3 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)

Do you see value in this patch or is it just unnecessary baggage?

I am not very impressed by the counting.  It probably makes more sense to
count only what we are actually going to process and emit, i.e. always use
no-merges (do we even support format-patch on a merge?).