Re: [dev] which versions are dwm patches intended to apply to cleanly?

From: Quentin Rameau <>
Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2016 09:12:30 +0200

> Well, fair enough. My final suggestion is then:
> <project>-<patch title>-<YYYYMMDD>-<short hash>.patch
> Would make:
> st-externalpipe-20160423-ea87104.patch

Yes I prefer this too, iirc that's the format suggested on the last
discussion on that topic.
The date here will satisfy sorting, and the hash is quite handy to
looking changes since the last working commit
(for example: git log -p short-hash..)
Should the date remain the creation date while the hash is updated, or
should the date be bumped up too?

> I disagree with the concern that people can't cope with short hashes.
> If they are able to perform a wiki contribution, we should assume that
> they will cope well. And googling for "short git hash" or similar
> points to results immediatly.

And add some hints on a wiki page explaining what format is expected and
how to get it.
Received on Fri Jun 17 2016 - 09:12:30 CEST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Jun 17 2016 - 09:24:11 CEST