From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Johannes Schindelin Subject: Re: Using thunderbird to post/apply patches? Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2008 11:38:20 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: References: <46a038f90802071521n674b61c2t5e4d4c740375b951@mail.gmail.com> <47AB97EC.8030002@nrlssc.navy.mil> <76718490802072010x63e2082akf1aa92b12cd24030@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: Brandon Casey , Martin Langhoff , Git Mailing List To: Jay Soffian X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Feb 08 12:38:54 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1JNRZF-0001zm-Eb for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Fri, 08 Feb 2008 12:38:53 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753021AbYBHLiQ (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Feb 2008 06:38:16 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752052AbYBHLiQ (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Feb 2008 06:38:16 -0500 Received: from mail.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20]:57484 "HELO mail.gmx.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1751855AbYBHLiO (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Feb 2008 06:38:14 -0500 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 08 Feb 2008 11:38:12 -0000 Received: from host86-138-198-40.range86-138.btcentralplus.com (EHLO racer.home) [86.138.198.40] by mail.gmx.net (mp027) with SMTP; 08 Feb 2008 12:38:12 +0100 X-Authenticated: #1490710 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1+/FsEWUzy/pvM2ZxE3Lze3tg3aWrz2G3SYv14x+a 0qUfoWDGC7ad9h X-X-Sender: gene099@racer.site In-Reply-To: <76718490802072010x63e2082akf1aa92b12cd24030@mail.gmail.com> User-Agent: Alpine 1.00 (LSU 882 2007-12-20) X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Hi, On Thu, 7 Feb 2008, Jay Soffian wrote: > On Feb 7, 2008 6:44 PM, Brandon Casey wrote: > > > I also have mailnews.send_plaintext_flowed => false as suggested in > > SubmittingPatches. > > Would teaching git-mailsplit to handle format=flowed be considered a > useful contribution? > > (W/o sounding like a total script weenie, I'm actually wondering if > converting git-am, git-mailsplit, and git-mailinfo to Perl code wouldn't > be a bad idea... groking email is a lot more pleasant in Perl than shell > and/or C.) FWIW I think you have it backwards. It might look nicer in Perl, but we try very hard to consolidate the major pieces into C code. This is done for several reasons: - reducing dependencies (not everybody needs all git programs, so it even helps if one script is converted at a time), and - making the experience nicer on Windows (reducing the foot-print, since Perl is _not_ commonly installed, and drastically improving performance, since the number of processes is reduced). So no, I would not like these scripts being converted (back?) to scripts. Thank you, Dscho