From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Martin Langhoff Subject: Re: [RFC] Patches exchange is bad? Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2005 21:07:19 +1200 Message-ID: <46a038f90508170207578b1c0@mail.gmail.com> References: <20050817082709.28135.qmail@web26301.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Cc: Daniel Barkalow , git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Aug 17 11:08:31 2005 Return-path: Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1E5JtL-000862-8z for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Wed, 17 Aug 2005 11:07:23 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751012AbVHQJHU (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Aug 2005 05:07:20 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751013AbVHQJHU (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Aug 2005 05:07:20 -0400 Received: from rproxy.gmail.com ([64.233.170.202]:20803 "EHLO rproxy.gmail.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751011AbVHQJHU convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Aug 2005 05:07:20 -0400 Received: by rproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id i8so100594rne for ; Wed, 17 Aug 2005 02:07:19 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=JvdaL4BDpZbEc4Ku10zA9kgbzqB4+Wz+qr6LyFLxCUoJB8EVAaWZIVLl5xRJmK01ENZsptypb8NFXiBGKsCv5VPBSG929gcL5nGEaf41sV60CnBnaQRO63nHDXe01Mom9pzAdDKO+VnVRsIwcdXUNMnSv5S0ENEm6KBMKdlXszU= Received: by 10.38.209.36 with SMTP id h36mr98720rng; Wed, 17 Aug 2005 02:07:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.38.101.8 with HTTP; Wed, 17 Aug 2005 02:07:19 -0700 (PDT) To: Marco Costalba In-Reply-To: <20050817082709.28135.qmail@web26301.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Content-Disposition: inline Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On 8/17/05, Marco Costalba wrote: > Of course I can feed proper subject and description to git-commit but I would like > to find something less intrusive I don't know if it helps, but I think that StGIT is what you are looking for, not only because you have more tools to deal with patches, but also because patches that are in the 'stack' are actually really malleable. You can edit and reedit the patch w its commit msg and all, commit it to the stack, and reedit it again later. It only becomes immutable when you commit to the underlying git repo. cheers, martin