From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Petr Baudis Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] pg - A patch porcelain for GIT Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2006 22:00:01 +0100 Message-ID: <20060213210001.GA31278@pasky.or.cz> References: <20060210195914.GA1350@spearce.org> <20060210211740.GO31278@pasky.or.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Feb 13 22:00:01 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1F8knb-00062R-Sd for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Mon, 13 Feb 2006 21:59:56 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S964863AbWBMU7X (ORCPT ); Mon, 13 Feb 2006 15:59:23 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S964869AbWBMU7W (ORCPT ); Mon, 13 Feb 2006 15:59:22 -0500 Received: from w241.dkm.cz ([62.24.88.241]:9091 "EHLO machine.or.cz") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S964863AbWBMU7U (ORCPT ); Mon, 13 Feb 2006 15:59:20 -0500 Received: (qmail 1977 invoked by uid 2001); 13 Feb 2006 22:00:01 +0100 To: git@vger.kernel.org Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20060210211740.GO31278@pasky.or.cz> X-message-flag: Outlook : A program to spread viri, but it can do mail too. User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Hi, Dear diary, on Fri, Feb 10, 2006 at 10:17:40PM CET, I got a letter where Petr Baudis said that... > > I just posted the first public version of pg, a GIT porcelain for > > managing patches. Think StGIT, but better in some ways: > > it sounds interesting. I've been thinking about wrapping some patch > queue tool in Cogito (post-1.0) and pg might be a better choice than > StGIT. so I've used it a bit and I'm going back to StGIT, at least for now. It is not really usable for me so far, since it is missing two crucial things: * Patch description tracking. Patch description is almost as important as patch contents for me, and pg just doesn't track it for now. It would be best if it just seeded the patch description by the first commit message and then allow you edit it at the refresh time. * Mail interface. StGIT can pre-fill the patch description with my signoff line, but more importantly when I write stg mail patchname it will mail the patch to the addresses I configured it to, prepend [PATCH] to the subject line and stuff. So, my patchqueue workflow is "I do some random third-party patches for some software and want to manage, update, and submit them easily." PG does not make it much easier now, unfortunately. Some common gripes for both StGIT and pg (well, I'm using some ridiculously old StGIT version, so this may not apply anymore there): * stg new --force - seriously, what's the point?! I always to the change first and when it's any good, I want to create a patch for it. * I can't just get the patch in its "canonical ready-to-mail form" on stdout so that I could easily review it. Why is pg-export insisting to dump it to a file? -- Petr "Pasky" Baudis Stuff: http://pasky.or.cz/ Of the 3 great composers Mozart tells us what it's like to be human, Beethoven tells us what it's like to be Beethoven and Bach tells us what it's like to be the universe. -- Douglas Adams