From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: git notes: notes Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2010 13:08:07 -0800 Message-ID: <7veilk1o3s.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <20100120050343.GA12860@gnu.kitenet.net> <201001201148.11701.johan@herland.net> <20100120182438.GB31507@gnu.kitenet.net> <7vhbqg376b.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <20100120195626.GA6641@gnu.kitenet.net> <7vska01qrt.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <4B576F5C.2050102@drmicha.warpmail.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Junio C Hamano , Joey Hess , git@vger.kernel.org To: Michael J Gruber X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Jan 20 22:08:43 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1NXhn9-0001Oo-1s for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Wed, 20 Jan 2010 22:08:43 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754664Ab0ATVIW (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Jan 2010 16:08:22 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754659Ab0ATVIV (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Jan 2010 16:08:21 -0500 Received: from a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com ([208.72.237.25]:41563 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754499Ab0ATVIS (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Jan 2010 16:08:18 -0500 Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C4FD092069; Wed, 20 Jan 2010 16:08:16 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=to:cc:subject :references:from:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=kk6lntlgjqJgLoByff44p1d1HPg=; b=ex9VoD FZorN+42+O4xZLyTp1Qz/v4NGSSc5/XJLgLOoNQF5JHBegAmvsgU5/iuGf8fHKUv 3kMAwj1sfgrAgGb89DDJEzcywbFP34pAZIiPHRuy+39fHOIj3YSwbjchKpj7Ld8v +lAdgDf3nUYCHwWvi2VynlD0kRJC7anc1xjGE= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=to:cc:subject :references:from:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=ppKL64wrmzkHJJ9n5eR1pgBbz3hMf0LO J62UVZBKAm29nrNBzFC4CIECivvNlQ+7WLmTQLd+b5HZbUBUVJvd6hCC9LxtSuTw yiIvKrVr28LBTQ2IlCosZK30hp1bUzgs7ACuLR4+HmnZnBiTWiE7Tns9nv5m/bbx WIsxqM8wKU0= Received: from a-pb-sasl-quonix. (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C98592068; Wed, 20 Jan 2010 16:08:13 -0500 (EST) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [68.225.240.211]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8715792065; Wed, 20 Jan 2010 16:08:08 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <4B576F5C.2050102@drmicha.warpmail.net> (Michael J. Gruber's message of "Wed\, 20 Jan 2010 22\:02\:20 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.2 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: EBCF2090-0607-11DF-A288-6AF7ED7EF46B-77302942!a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Michael J Gruber writes: > Junio C Hamano venit, vidit, dixit 20.01.2010 21:10: >> Joey Hess writes: >> >>> Do you think it makes sense for even git log --format=format:%s to be >>> porcelain and potentially change when new features are used? >> >> If the series changed the meaning of "%s" format to mean "the subject of >> the commit and notes information", with or without documenting it, then it >> is just a bug we would like to fix. > > No, but outputting the note as part of the log is the standard. So for > example, when you do a format-patch | apply cycle, format-patch will > insert the note as part of the commit message, and apply will *store* > the note text (including Note:\n) as part of the commit message of the > new commit. Thanks; that was the kind of breakage report I was looking for (and wished to have heard a lot earlier). Personally I find it is unexcusable that format-patch defaults to giving notes. > So, I would say the notes feature is not that well integrated right now, No question about it. > I'm not complaining, I actually have this on a maybe-to-do list, but the > way the series went kept me from investing time. Hmm, that hints there is a failure in the review and merge process. Care to explain how we could have done better please?