From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "H. Peter Anvin" Subject: Re: [RFC] git email submissions Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 09:53:23 -0800 Message-ID: <437B7213.2020406@zytor.com> References: <437B4472.1080401@pobox.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Jeff Garzik , Git Mailing List X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Nov 16 18:54:38 2005 Return-path: Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EcRTh-0000KO-HO for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Wed, 16 Nov 2005 18:53:49 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1030288AbVKPRxr (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Nov 2005 12:53:47 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1030289AbVKPRxr (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Nov 2005 12:53:47 -0500 Received: from terminus.zytor.com ([192.83.249.54]:52695 "EHLO terminus.zytor.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1030288AbVKPRxq (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Nov 2005 12:53:46 -0500 Received: from [10.4.1.13] (yardgnome.orionmulti.com [209.128.68.65]) (authenticated bits=0) by terminus.zytor.com (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id jAGHrS2L003879 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 16 Nov 2005 09:53:28 -0800 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7-1.1.fc4 (X11/20050929) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en To: Linus Torvalds In-Reply-To: X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV version 0.87.1, clamav-milter version 0.87 on localhost X-Virus-Status: Clean X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.0.4 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.4 (2005-06-05) on terminus.zytor.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Linus Torvalds wrote: > > On Wed, 16 Nov 2005, Jeff Garzik wrote: > >>For people without _any_ hosting, it would be nice to give them a method to >>submit some git changes via email. > > Well, as long as you don't expect me to take those things.. > > BK had it with "bk send"/"bk receive", I used it a couple of times and > refuse to do it again. > Personally I think it would be nice if you could do an augmented patchset so that the end result is the same (with the same SHA1 IDs) as if one had merged a pull, while still being a human-readable patchset. The advantage with that is that once merged it'll do the right thing on the author's end. I think that's pretty much my answer to Jeff's question :) -hpa