From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Nikolai Weibull Subject: Re: git-send-mail in sh Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2005 11:12:09 +0100 Message-ID: <20051125101209.GA8868@puritan.petwork> References: <4386DD45.6030308@op5.se> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Nov 25 11:15:04 2005 Return-path: Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EfaZz-0007rV-2W for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Fri, 25 Nov 2005 11:13:19 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751426AbVKYKMM (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 Nov 2005 05:12:12 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751427AbVKYKMM (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 Nov 2005 05:12:12 -0500 Received: from mxfep01.bredband.com ([195.54.107.70]:62683 "EHLO mxfep01.bredband.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751426AbVKYKMK (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 Nov 2005 05:12:10 -0500 Received: from puritan.petwork ([213.112.43.250] [213.112.43.250]) by mxfep01.bredband.com with ESMTP id <20051125101209.YXGT26888.mxfep01.bredband.com@puritan.petwork> for ; Fri, 25 Nov 2005 11:12:09 +0100 Received: by puritan.petwork (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 7CC59ADFE5; Fri, 25 Nov 2005 11:12:09 +0100 (CET) To: Git Mailing List Mail-Followup-To: Git Mailing List Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4386DD45.6030308@op5.se> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Andreas Ericsson wrote: > Finally giving up on git-send-email (I won't install the 6 perl-modules > it requires and I don't know perl enough to remove the need for them), I > hacked up a replacement in sh. It's more aptly named as well. ;) > It's better than the perl version because; > 1. It doesn't have any requirements other than normal unix-commands and > "mail" being in the path. > 2. It can generate the patches on the fly, using git-format-patch. Great! > It's worse than the perl version because; > 1. It doesn't thread the patch-series (which I personally prefer anyway > since it's easier to follow a thread on a particular patch that way). Not so great. Why is it so much more difficult to have one more level of nesting? It's annoying, but it's a lot less annoying than having 19 separate threads that are all, in fact, related to each other. > 2. The patches sent within the same second arrive in random order. Perhaps adding a 'sleep 1' would help? (The delay may be unacceptable to some people, though.) nikolai -- Nikolai Weibull: now available free of charge at http://bitwi.se/! Born in Chicago, IL USA; currently residing in Gothenburg, Sweden. main(){printf(&linux["\021%six\012\0"],(linux)["have"]+"fun"-97);}