[PATCH 0/9] applymbox updates and assorted trivial patches.

[PATCH 0/9] applymbox updates and assorted trivial patches.

[Junio C Hamano]

I was experimenting with applypatch and applymbox to see how it
feels like being Linus ;-) and also I saw some trivially correct
patches on the list floating unmerged during KS/OLS.

Since I rebase my repostitory to fix up the history often, I
needed a reliable way to preserve authorship information when I
export the patches via format-patch and slurp them via applymbox.

I am sending the following changes to applymbox and format-patch
first:

  [PATCH] tools/applymbox: allow manual fixing and continuing after a failure.
  [PATCH] git-format-patch-script and mailinfo updates.
  [PATCH] format-patch: --mbox and --check.

I wrote the first one to recover from a situation where an
earlier patch failed to apply but I still had many other e-mails
in the mailbox.

The second one allows format-patch to give ability to optionally
add From: and Date: lines as the first two lines after the patch
title line.  The mailinfo program has been enhanced to grok
Date: in the top part of the message body just like From: in the
message body can override the sender of the e-mail.

The third one is an extra.  It lets me export patches in a
format resembling UNIX mbox, so I can concatenate the output
together and reprocess them through applymbox.

After they are accepted, I will forward these trivially correct
patches I saw on the list, using the enhanced format-patch; they
are expected to be processed with the new applymbox as a
practice; by doing this I am also ACKing these patches:

  [PATCH] debian/ fixes
  [PATCH] Fix a typo in git-unpack-objects documentation.
  [PATCH] Cleanup: git-verify-tag-script
  [PATCH] Install git-verify-tag-script
  [PATCH] Support more http features: https no cert, .netrc -> auth
  [PATCH] Document "curl" requirements.

Re: [PATCH 0/9] applymbox updates and assorted trivial patches.

[Ryan Anderson]

On Wed, Jul 20, 2005 at 04:30:29PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Since I rebase my repostitory to fix up the history often, I
> needed a reliable way to preserve authorship information when I
> export the patches via format-patch and slurp them via applymbox.

Is it just me, or does format-patch lose the commit comments during
export?  I haven't experimented with your new patches yet - and since
I'm at OLS and playing with Git during my free time, my brain is pretty
much shut down now - so if you have happen to have fixed that, thanks!

[...]

> After they are accepted, I will forward these trivially correct
> patches I saw on the list, using the enhanced format-patch; they
> are expected to be processed with the new applymbox as a
> practice; by doing this I am also ACKing these patches:
> 
>   [PATCH] debian/ fixes

I have more debian/ fixes - I cc:ed you on them since I see you are
collecting things this week.

-- 

Ryan Anderson
  sometimes Pug Majere

Re: [PATCH 0/9] applymbox updates and assorted trivial patches.

[Junio C Hamano]

Ryan Anderson <ryan@michonline.com> writes:

> Is it just me, or does format-patch lose the commit comments during
> export?  I haven't experimented with your new patches yet - and since
> I'm at OLS and playing with Git during my free time, my brain is pretty
> much shut down now - so if you have happen to have fixed that, thanks!

Oh, I envy you guys!  Have fun at OLS.

As far as I know, the commit comments are not lost since the
original version of format-patch.  What I added as extras with
today's patch are the original author name, email and author
timestamp.  There wasn't a provision to record these in the
output from format-patch.

The applymbox/applypatch pair Linus did allowed you to have an
extra "From:" line as the first line of the e-mail patch
submission when you are forwarding a patch somebody else has
written.  When such e-mail is applied to his repository using
applymbox (back then it was called "dotest"), however, the
original author timestamp is lost, and instead the commit gets
timestamp from the message forwarding the patch.  That is what I
meant by the loss of information.

Once I acked a patch to Linus with "Author-Date:" line as the
second line of the e-mail message (the first being the "From:"),
and he told me to refrain from doing it "for now", but that "for
now" has never been lifted, so I decided to lift it myself ;-).

The changed format-patch can be told to produce "Date:" (instead
of "Author-Date:"), and "From:".  There is a corresponding
change to the receiving end (the mailinfo program that is used
by applymbox/applypatch pair) to read this extra "Date:" line
and use that instead of the timestamp obtained from the e-mail
submission.

[PATCH 0/9] applymbox updates and assorted trivial patches.

[Junio C Hamano]

(Resend after you said you prefer people resending).

I was experimenting with applypatch and applymbox to see how it
feels like being Linus ;-) and also I saw some trivially correct
patches on the list floating unmerged during KS/OLS.

Since I rebase my repostitory to fix up the history often, I
needed a reliable way to preserve authorship information when I
export the patches via format-patch and slurp them via applymbox.

I am sending the following changes to applymbox and format-patch
first:

  [PATCH] tools/applymbox: allow manual fixing and continuing after a failure.
  [PATCH] git-format-patch-script and mailinfo updates.
  [PATCH] format-patch: --mbox and --check.

I wrote the first one to recover from a situation where an
earlier patch failed to apply but I still had many other e-mails
in the mailbox.

The second one allows format-patch to give ability to optionally
add From: and Date: lines as the first two lines after the patch
title line.  The mailinfo program has been enhanced to grok
Date: in the top part of the message body just like From: in the
message body can override the sender of the e-mail.

The third one is an extra.  It lets me export patches in a
format resembling UNIX mbox, so I can concatenate the output
together and reprocess them through applymbox.

After they are accepted, I will forward these trivially correct
patches I saw on the list, using the enhanced format-patch; they
are expected to be processed with the new applymbox as a
practice; by doing this I am also ACKing these patches:

  [PATCH] debian/ fixes
  [PATCH] Fix a typo in git-unpack-objects documentation.
  [PATCH] Cleanup: git-verify-tag-script
  [PATCH] Install git-verify-tag-script
  [PATCH] Support more http features: https no cert, .netrc -> auth
  [PATCH] Document "curl" requirements.