From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757965AbZBMJU7 (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Feb 2009 04:20:59 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750846AbZBMJUn (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Feb 2009 04:20:43 -0500 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([18.85.46.34]:40554 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750800AbZBMJUl (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Feb 2009 04:20:41 -0500 Subject: Re: git-send-email From: Peter Zijlstra To: Junio C Hamano Cc: Lennart Sorensen , Ingo Oeser , L-K , Linus Torvalds In-Reply-To: <7vmycrf5dv.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <1234451714.10603.22.camel@laptop> <200902121825.35021.ioe-lkml@rameria.de> <20090212192104.GD15809@csclub.uwaterloo.ca> <7vmycrf5dv.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2009 10:22:38 +0100 Message-Id: <1234516958.6519.6.camel@twins> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.24.3 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 2009-02-12 at 18:16 -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > lsorense@csclub.uwaterloo.ca (Lennart Sorensen) writes: > > > On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 06:25:34PM +0100, Ingo Oeser wrote: > >> No, they are great, if you like to skip over a topic, you are not > >> interested in at all! > >> > >> If you don't like it, just switch off thread in your mailer and > >> don't force this on everybody else! > > > > Actually if (as apparently many people seem to manage to do) you have a > > single starting email, with all the patches as replies to that first > > email, it looks a lot better, and is much easier to follow. > > > > Seperate threads would be bad. > > > > foobar patch 0 (usually a summary/overview) > > +-foobar patch 1 > > +-foobar patch 2 > > +-foobar patch 3 > > +-foobar patch 4 > > +-foobar patch 5 > > > > is much nicer than > > > > foobar patch 0 > > +-foobar patch 1 > > +-foobar patch 2 > > +-foobar patch 3 > > +-foobar patch 4 > > +-foobar patch 5 > > > > which seems to be what git does itself. > > I personally prefer the former, but as you hopefully all found out by now, > the choice between these two is just the matter of personal taste, and > there is no clear majority. > > The default will not going to change. Its a matter of usability, the inf deep chain git does by default renders the result unusable. Fact is I usually skip over patch series posted that way, simply because its too much of a bother. If you can't be bothered with usability of your project, then so be it. Maybe all those rants on how unusable git is have a point after all.