From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: git-commit: allow From: line to be entered in commit message Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 12:33:48 -0800 Message-ID: <7virsn50lv.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> References: <20060112093700.1d3d25db.seanlkml@sympatico.ca> <20060112190031.GH14196@ca-server1.us.oracle.com> <7vhd89mc0y.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <20060113065855.GJ14196@ca-server1.us.oracle.com> <7vpsmwbo9s.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <20060113191231.GM14196@ca-server1.us.oracle.com> <7vhd877w9m.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <20060113200124.GO14196@ca-server1.us.oracle.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Jan 13 21:34:04 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 1ExVcQ-00046u-Ml for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Fri, 13 Jan 2006 21:33:55 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1422931AbWAMUdv (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Jan 2006 15:33:51 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1422932AbWAMUdv (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Jan 2006 15:33:51 -0500 Received: from fed1rmmtao01.cox.net ([68.230.241.38]:12502 "EHLO fed1rmmtao01.cox.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1422931AbWAMUdu (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Jan 2006 15:33:50 -0500 Received: from assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net ([68.4.9.127]) by fed1rmmtao01.cox.net (InterMail vM.6.01.05.02 201-2131-123-102-20050715) with ESMTP id <20060113203255.FACM15695.fed1rmmtao01.cox.net@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>; Fri, 13 Jan 2006 15:32:55 -0500 To: Joel Becker In-Reply-To: <20060113200124.GO14196@ca-server1.us.oracle.com> (Joel Becker's message of "Fri, 13 Jan 2006 12:01:24 -0800") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110004 (No Gnus v0.4) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Joel Becker writes: > On Fri, Jan 13, 2006 at 11:39:17AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> That's what I do. Although I use git-am not git-applymbox, both >> of them are designed to work that way. > > While I can see that git-am and git-applymbox have different > options for the same basic task, I can't quite see why one would be > preferred to the other. What does git-am do that git-applymbox does > not? Sorry about the confusion. This is turning into a FAQ and it is all _my_ fault [*1*]. Some historical background. - "applymbox" was there first. It was renamed from a tool 'dotest' Linus had used since BK days, with somewhat unextensible command line syntax. - "am" was invented later, to majorly redo what applymbox does with extensible command line syntax. It is supposed to do everything applymbox does, but the only thing it does not support is to be command-line compatible. The primary reason why I kept applymbox maintained is because many "How to hack kernel with git" documents floating around talk about applymbox, and it still is used by Linus to apply patches with his trained fingers. Worse yet, it could be that applymbox is used as a building block in larger private scripts used by kernel developers, and its removal would force them to update their scripts to use "am" instead. I do not want to see the kernel people spending their time on adjusting their private tools for git changes unnecessarily; their time is better spent on improving the kernel. So in short, I tend to recommend "am" to new people, but "applymbox" is still usable. [Footnote] *1* I do not mind keeping applymbox maintained, but at the same time I know I would feel it stupid to carry two tools that do almost the same thing if it were somebody else's project, and every time this issue comes up I feel the urge to say "in 3 months, git-applymbox will be removed, please get used to git-am", which so far I ended up resisting.