* serious problem with `git format-patch' & `git am'
@ 2009-02-25 22:03 Werner LEMBERG
2009-02-26 10:42 ` Johannes Schindelin
2009-02-26 18:00 ` Brandon Casey
0 siblings, 2 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Werner LEMBERG @ 2009-02-25 22:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: git; +Cc: keithp
[both version 1.6.0.2 and git from 2009-01-24]
Folks,
I'm going to convert the FreeType CVS repository to git, using Keith
Packard's `parsecvs'. It sometimes happens that there are git entries
titled
*** empty log message ***
I want to massage the git repository before publishing it, replacing
those entries with something more meaningful.
The last time I tested this (using git 1.5.something, I no longer
remember the exact version) I did the following:
. git format-patch <start>..HEAD
git reset --hard <start>
. Edit the `Subject:' field in the created *.patch files where
necessary.
. git am --whitespace=nowarn *.patch
Unfortunately, this no longer works as before, and since I can't find
a hint in the docs about this change I wonder whether it is a bug.
With git 1.5.something, if the first paragraph of the commit message
(as output by parsecvs) looks like this
foo foo foo foo
bar bar bar bar
baz baz baz baz
it is emitted exactly as-is (after `git format-patch' & `git am');
gitk shows `foo foo foo foo' as the first line. However, git version
1.6.0.2 and the current git both convert newlines to spaces in the
first paragraph! I now get
foo foo foo foo bar bar bar bar baz baz baz baz
as the beginning of the commit message which is VERY bad since
CVS-style entries often have a long first paragraph, causing
ugly-looking, overlong lines.
In case this is an intended change I ask you urgently to provide an
option to get back the old behaviour of `git format-patch' & `git am'.
Werner
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread* Re: serious problem with `git format-patch' & `git am' 2009-02-25 22:03 serious problem with `git format-patch' & `git am' Werner LEMBERG @ 2009-02-26 10:42 ` Johannes Schindelin 2009-02-26 18:00 ` Brandon Casey 1 sibling, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread From: Johannes Schindelin @ 2009-02-26 10:42 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Werner LEMBERG; +Cc: git, keithp Hi, [welcome on the Git list, Werner!] On Wed, 25 Feb 2009, Werner LEMBERG wrote: > > [both version 1.6.0.2 and git from 2009-01-24] > > Folks, > > > I'm going to convert the FreeType CVS repository to git, using Keith > Packard's `parsecvs'. It sometimes happens that there are git entries > titled > > *** empty log message *** > > I want to massage the git repository before publishing it, replacing > those entries with something more meaningful. > > The last time I tested this (using git 1.5.something, I no longer > remember the exact version) I did the following: > > . git format-patch <start>..HEAD > git reset --hard <start> > > . Edit the `Subject:' field in the created *.patch files where > necessary. > > . git am --whitespace=nowarn *.patch > > Unfortunately, this no longer works as before, and since I can't find > a hint in the docs about this change I wonder whether it is a bug. > > With git 1.5.something, if the first paragraph of the commit message > (as output by parsecvs) looks like this > > foo foo foo foo > bar bar bar bar > baz baz baz baz > > it is emitted exactly as-is (after `git format-patch' & `git am'); > gitk shows `foo foo foo foo' as the first line. However, git version > 1.6.0.2 and the current git both convert newlines to spaces in the > first paragraph! I now get > > foo foo foo foo bar bar bar bar baz baz baz baz > > as the beginning of the commit message which is VERY bad since > CVS-style entries often have a long first paragraph, causing > ugly-looking, overlong lines. > > In case this is an intended change I ask you urgently to provide an > option to get back the old behaviour of `git format-patch' & `git am'. It is an intended change, for the _opposite_ case: some people thrive on overly-long subject lines, and the change was supposed to help them. I was not sure if it would be a good change back then, but I did not have anything concrete I could present as an example where the behavior hurts. In your case, I suggest using something different, though. Either use "rebase -i" and mark the commits you want to massage as "edit", or use "fast-export > dump", edit "dump" by hand, and then reimport the whole thing using fast-import. IMHO your use case is not a good candidate for format-patch, as that program was really meant for patch submission (even if it also serves other purposes pretty well). Ciao, Dscho ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: serious problem with `git format-patch' & `git am' 2009-02-25 22:03 serious problem with `git format-patch' & `git am' Werner LEMBERG 2009-02-26 10:42 ` Johannes Schindelin @ 2009-02-26 18:00 ` Brandon Casey 2009-02-27 1:11 ` Jakub Narebski 2009-02-27 9:16 ` Werner LEMBERG 1 sibling, 2 replies; 8+ messages in thread From: Brandon Casey @ 2009-02-26 18:00 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Werner LEMBERG; +Cc: git, keithp Werner LEMBERG wrote: > [both version 1.6.0.2 and git from 2009-01-24] > > Folks, > > > I'm going to convert the FreeType CVS repository to git, using Keith > Packard's `parsecvs'. It sometimes happens that there are git entries > titled > > *** empty log message *** > > I want to massage the git repository before publishing it, replacing > those entries with something more meaningful. > > The last time I tested this (using git 1.5.something, I no longer > remember the exact version) I did the following: > > . git format-patch <start>..HEAD > git reset --hard <start> > > . Edit the `Subject:' field in the created *.patch files where > necessary. > > . git am --whitespace=nowarn *.patch > > Unfortunately, this no longer works as before, and since I can't find > a hint in the docs about this change I wonder whether it is a bug. > > With git 1.5.something, if the first paragraph of the commit message > (as output by parsecvs) looks like this > > foo foo foo foo > bar bar bar bar > baz baz baz baz > > it is emitted exactly as-is (after `git format-patch' & `git am'); > gitk shows `foo foo foo foo' as the first line. However, git version > 1.6.0.2 and the current git both convert newlines to spaces in the > first paragraph! I now get > > foo foo foo foo bar bar bar bar baz baz baz baz > > as the beginning of the commit message which is VERY bad since > CVS-style entries often have a long first paragraph, causing > ugly-looking, overlong lines. > > In case this is an intended change I ask you urgently to provide an > option to get back the old behaviour of `git format-patch' & `git am'. I was not aware of this behavior, but it looks like the '-k' option for both format-patch and git-am is what you want to use. It will prevent mailinfo from munging the commit message. -brandon ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: serious problem with `git format-patch' & `git am' 2009-02-26 18:00 ` Brandon Casey @ 2009-02-27 1:11 ` Jakub Narebski 2009-02-27 2:10 ` Junio C Hamano 2009-02-27 9:16 ` Werner LEMBERG 1 sibling, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread From: Jakub Narebski @ 2009-02-27 1:11 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Brandon Casey; +Cc: Werner LEMBERG, git, keithp Brandon Casey <casey@nrlssc.navy.mil> writes: > Werner LEMBERG wrote: > > [both version 1.6.0.2 and git from 2009-01-24] > > > > I'm going to convert the FreeType CVS repository to git, using Keith > > Packard's `parsecvs'. >From what I understand it is not maintained, is not incremental, and requires access to *,v files. Why not use more modern and actively developed cvs2git tool from cvs2svn project[1]? [1] http://cvs2svn.tigris.org [2] http://git.or.cz/gitwiki/InterfacesFrontendsAndTools "Interaction with other Revision Control Systems" section > > It sometimes happens that there are git entries > > titled > > > > *** empty log message *** > > > > I want to massage the git repository before publishing it, replacing > > those entries with something more meaningful. > > > > The last time I tested this (using git 1.5.something, I no longer > > remember the exact version) I did the following: > > > > . git format-patch <start>..HEAD > > git reset --hard <start> > > > > . Edit the `Subject:' field in the created *.patch files where > > necessary. > > > > . git am --whitespace=nowarn *.patch You can use the following alternate solutions: * git rebase --interactive (perhaps with --root option if your git supports it, or cherry-pick root commit by hand if it does not), changing 'pick' to 'edit' for patches (commits) that you want to modify commit message. * if you can automate the changes, i.e. if you can script it, the best solution would be to use git-filter-branch instead; or use fast-export / fast-import pair with your filter in the middle. > > > > Unfortunately, this no longer works as before, and since I can't find > > a hint in the docs about this change I wonder whether it is a bug. > > > > With git 1.5.something, if the first paragraph of the commit message > > (as output by parsecvs) looks like this > > > > foo foo foo foo > > bar bar bar bar > > baz baz baz baz > > > > it is emitted exactly as-is (after `git format-patch' & `git am'); > > gitk shows `foo foo foo foo' as the first line. However, git version > > 1.6.0.2 and the current git both convert newlines to spaces in the > > first paragraph! I now get > > > > foo foo foo foo bar bar bar bar baz baz baz baz > > > > as the beginning of the commit message which is VERY bad since > > CVS-style entries often have a long first paragraph, causing > > ugly-looking, overlong lines. This is caused by the fact that git-am assumes that subject line goes as first line of commit message, with empty line separating it from the rest of commit message which comes from the body of email. It used to preserve line breaking in Subject: line, if it was broken into lines using continuation style for email headers, but that was wrong solution in the intended use case (applying patches from email, patches conforming to git commit message conventions), as Subject: line could have been broken into multiple lines by the _transport_ layer, and not intended to be broken. > > > > In case this is an intended change I ask you urgently to provide an > > option to get back the old behaviour of `git format-patch' & `git am'. > > I was not aware of this behavior, but it looks like the '-k' option for > both format-patch and git-am is what you want to use. It will prevent > mailinfo from munging the commit message. I think you want undocumented but for the git-am usage (e.g. 'git am -h') --rebasing option to git-am, which makes git-am preserve Subject: line formatting, _including_ line breaking (I think that -k/--keep does preserve subject, but does not preserve line breaking; I haven't checked this, though). Note that in this case you would have to make git-format-patch to not output subject prefix ([PATCH]). See how git-rebase.sh does it. -- Jakub Narebski Poland ShadeHawk on #git ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: serious problem with `git format-patch' & `git am' 2009-02-27 1:11 ` Jakub Narebski @ 2009-02-27 2:10 ` Junio C Hamano 2009-02-27 15:47 ` Brandon Casey 0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread From: Junio C Hamano @ 2009-02-27 2:10 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jakub Narebski; +Cc: Brandon Casey, Werner LEMBERG, git, keithp Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com> writes: > I think you want undocumented but for the git-am usage (e.g. 'git am > -h') --rebasing option to git-am, which makes git-am preserve Subject: > line formatting,... I have to warn that that one requires you to have proper commit object to begin with. IOW, the first line "From [0-9a-f]{40} date" must record an existing object name. As you said, "am" is for applying e-mailed patches and filter-branch would be the best fit for fixing imported history, but whichever tool is used, I think it is a mistake to try preserving a "one-line-per-paragraph" format the original poster seems to have, i.e.: foo foo foo foo bar bar bar bar baz baz baz baz Yes, the low-level could create a commit object with a message like that, but all the Porcelains rely on "paragraphs are separated with a blank line" format. So no matter how the conversion is done, I think it would be a good idea to turn the above into: foo foo foo foo bar bar bar bar baz baz baz baz if the user wants to keep the resulting history any useful. To do it with "format-patch | am", you would format it like: Subject: foo foo foo foo From: author name <author.name@domain> Date: author date bar bar bar bar baz baz baz baz ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: serious problem with `git format-patch' & `git am' 2009-02-27 2:10 ` Junio C Hamano @ 2009-02-27 15:47 ` Brandon Casey 2009-02-27 17:53 ` Junio C Hamano 0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread From: Brandon Casey @ 2009-02-27 15:47 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Junio C Hamano; +Cc: Jakub Narebski, Werner LEMBERG, git, keithp Junio, I think you are the author of git-am.sh. What does this line do? git-am.sh line 375: case "$keep_subject" in -k) SUBJECT="[PATCH] $SUBJECT" ;; esac It appears to do nothing. It has existed since the beginning of git-am.sh, and there has never been another reference to $keep_subject in this script. Is it possible that $keep_subject is supposed to be $keep? -brandon ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: serious problem with `git format-patch' & `git am' 2009-02-27 15:47 ` Brandon Casey @ 2009-02-27 17:53 ` Junio C Hamano 0 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread From: Junio C Hamano @ 2009-02-27 17:53 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Brandon Casey; +Cc: Jakub Narebski, Werner LEMBERG, git, keithp Brandon Casey <casey@nrlssc.navy.mil> writes: > What does this line do? > > git-am.sh line 375: > > case "$keep_subject" in -k) SUBJECT="[PATCH] $SUBJECT" ;; esac > > It appears to do nothing. It has existed since the beginning of git-am.sh, > and there has never been another reference to $keep_subject in this script. > Is it possible that $keep_subject is supposed to be $keep? I do not think it is doing anything, and I do not think it makes sense to "fix" it to allow adding "[PATCH] " in front either. I'd vote for removing the entire thing. The $keep_subject variable and "add [PATCH] only to later strip" logic was borrowed from git-applymbox and git-applypatch pair, see 6bff6a6 (Teach applymbox to keep the Subject: line., 2005-08-16) especially for the change that affects tools/git-applypatch in the commit. I think there was a reason that -k refrained from adding the prefix in git-applypatch but the option to git-am needed to add the prefix which seems inconsistent but I do not recall the details. Maybe the list archive may know. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: serious problem with `git format-patch' & `git am' 2009-02-26 18:00 ` Brandon Casey 2009-02-27 1:11 ` Jakub Narebski @ 2009-02-27 9:16 ` Werner LEMBERG 1 sibling, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread From: Werner LEMBERG @ 2009-02-27 9:16 UTC (permalink / raw) To: casey; +Cc: git, keithp > I was not aware of this behavior, but it looks like the '-k' option > for both format-patch and git-am is what you want to use. It will > prevent mailinfo from munging the commit message. Tried it already. It doesn't help. Werner ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2009-02-27 17:55 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 8+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2009-02-25 22:03 serious problem with `git format-patch' & `git am' Werner LEMBERG 2009-02-26 10:42 ` Johannes Schindelin 2009-02-26 18:00 ` Brandon Casey 2009-02-27 1:11 ` Jakub Narebski 2009-02-27 2:10 ` Junio C Hamano 2009-02-27 15:47 ` Brandon Casey 2009-02-27 17:53 ` Junio C Hamano 2009-02-27 9:16 ` Werner LEMBERG
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.