Re: Is there a way to get the "format-patch" formatted file name?

["Vít Ondruch" <vondruch@redhat.com>]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1731 bytes --]


Dne 01. 09. 23 v 17:53 Junio C Hamano napsal(a):
> Oswald Buddenhagen <oswald.buddenhagen@gmx.de> writes:
>
>> but i wouldn't be opposed to for example git-mailinfo learning to
>> understand the --pretty argument, if the implementation doesn't turn
>> out to be completely out of proportion.
> Excellent suggestion.  I agree that 'mailinfo' would be the closest
> place we have for such a new feature.  It's "info" output (i.e. what
> comes out to the standard output of the command) is designed to be
> extensible, and I vaguely recall that we indeed have added new
> field(s) during its lifetime with existing users already.
>
> We can just invent a new label (e.g. "Filesystem-safe-subject:"),
> pass the subject string to pretty.c:format_sanitized_subject() and
> emit the result next to the existing "Subject:" with that label, and
> we can even do so unconditionally without breaking anybody.


'mailinfo' is new to me. I am not really sure what is the proper use of 
this tool, but it sound as a neat idea. I could certainly extract the 
string from the 'mailinfo' output and it works just above the .patch 
file, which is great.


>
>
> Having it in 'mailinfo' may still not be a good solution to the
> issue, given that Vit says
>
>>> But I typically don't have a Git.
> though.


Well, this should have been "I typically don't have a Git *repository*", 
because I certainly have a Git. Otherwise I would not ask for this 
functionality.

Just to explain, I would need to expand the sources, which I typically 
don't do. I'd need initialize the repository and commit everything, 
apply the patch, etc. In that case, I'd rater keep manually changing the 
patch names :)


Vít

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 840 bytes --]