From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Giuseppe Bilotta Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] StGit patch series import Date: Mon, 25 May 2009 00:18:25 +0200 Message-ID: References: <1243149558-17160-1-git-send-email-giuseppe.bilotta@gmail.com> <7voctirzu6.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <7vfxeurwh0.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon May 25 00:19:13 2009 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 1M8M2C-0005su-8g for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Mon, 25 May 2009 00:19:12 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753885AbZEXWS0 convert rfc822-to-quoted-printable (ORCPT ); Sun, 24 May 2009 18:18:26 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753573AbZEXWS0 (ORCPT ); Sun, 24 May 2009 18:18:26 -0400 Received: from mail-bw0-f174.google.com ([209.85.218.174]:46364 "EHLO mail-bw0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752334AbZEXWSZ convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Sun, 24 May 2009 18:18:25 -0400 Received: by bwz22 with SMTP id 22so2737947bwz.37 for ; Sun, 24 May 2009 15:18:25 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=LYBAP03JQnFvNX4kqfSpBhiIuLNEeyg1d6QpRq5rz98=; b=jPEmxEQbrCsKAqee8C04tze1hNCeWgSKPNJDN7IdH+yIWhgw9NQDoCP90ZR9vQ7MiR xpa3hlOMOpNcBLUEdhIafewlMlYqaJH1TSy5ryFnALEOkIcT1jpVvbxDTMkKuvB9spgq 9TvVNupjbFtxX36ui1PeX4kHTbqQ87g+FeIiw= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=Yi8M0khJkk5YL7GXV6NGH5MDmQILSz20jJpWNUy+kI3pImeYDfomW5Dz2UJwbf9G/d nLuS1H6iZSVzFBV5wOoy18eU3vzkA98ELFNLJlcfiXR+pwtAQBZqDhaKZkGVSVD3mY4y N0IBWUAzlXskj52v1rrpLAfjZDozEb0oJOi4k= Received: by 10.204.100.11 with SMTP id w11mr6322065bkn.32.1243203505729; Sun, 24 May 2009 15:18:25 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <7vfxeurwh0.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 12:02 AM, Junio C Hamano wr= ote: > Giuseppe Bilotta writes: > >> That was my initial thought too, but then I realized that having the >> 'heuristics' (although a very braindead one) in mailinfo makes more >> sense because otherwise StGIT patch autodetection would only work wh= en >> applying a whole series, and not when applying a single (or a few) >> patches. > > The above is very selfish---what if somebody else wanted to add a fea= ture > to grok a non-mailbox input to the same codepath, and it is not a StG= IT > patch? > > That is what I called "bad taste". > > The same comment may apply to the rest of your response. =A0"This hac= k is > good enough for _my_ use case; I do not care if my change makes life > harder for others to build on top of my patch" is not what I want to = see. Sorry, that's totally not the idea was trying to convey. In fact, just after sending the email I went back to the code to look for a better solution (I should have probably also made the first try a RFC). I did feel it was necessary to explain the reasons for the simplicity of the patches, especially since it gave me the chance to raises some points that I thought were worth discussing, such as the matter of where to place patch type autodetection. --=20 Giuseppe "Oblomov" Bilotta