From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) Subject: Re: [PATCH] Implement git-quiltimport (take 2) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 04:48:26 -0600 Message-ID: References: <7vbqtxaj5k.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <7v1wut2p5z.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <7vsln8cwn6.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <7vy7x09qet.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu May 18 12:49:12 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 1Fgg46-0006sc-5j for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Thu, 18 May 2006 12:49:10 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751095AbWERKtF (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 May 2006 06:49:05 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751100AbWERKtF (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 May 2006 06:49:05 -0400 Received: from ebiederm.dsl.xmission.com ([166.70.28.69]:21659 "EHLO ebiederm.dsl.xmission.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751095AbWERKtE (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 May 2006 06:49:04 -0400 Received: from ebiederm.dsl.xmission.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ebiederm.dsl.xmission.com (8.13.4/8.13.4/Debian-3) with ESMTP id k4IAmRAj026583; Thu, 18 May 2006 04:48:27 -0600 Received: (from eric@localhost) by ebiederm.dsl.xmission.com (8.13.4/8.13.4/Submit) id k4IAmQbF026582; Thu, 18 May 2006 04:48:26 -0600 X-Authentication-Warning: ebiederm.dsl.xmission.com: eric set sender to ebiederm@xmission.com using -f To: Junio C Hamano In-Reply-To: <7vy7x09qet.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> (Junio C. Hamano's message of "Wed, 17 May 2006 16:34:34 -0700") User-Agent: Gnus/5.1007 (Gnus v5.10.7) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Junio C Hamano writes: > ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) writes: > >> Junio C Hamano writes: >> >>> What's the expected workflow for you to work on a 1300 patch >>> series you get from Andrew in the next installment to deal with >>> 88 unattributed patches? Answer the question 88 times and make >>> sure you get the answers right every time? Or abort and >>> hand-edit them to help mailinfo to notice the correct >>> attribution and re-run? >> >> For the internal consumption case it isn't a big deal. I >> can specify --author with something bogus and it works. > > Yes. > >>> I know I am guilty of suggesting "going interactive", but I have >>> a feeling that having an optional file that maps patch-name to >>> author might be easier to work with. If the old patches are >>> recycled in the updated -mm set, you probably can reuse the >>> mapping for them, adding entries for newly introduced "unnamed" >>> patches as needed. >> >> Short of getting the script where it has a sane restart in the >> middle mode going interactive and asking questions makes a lot >> of sense. Especially with smaller trees. > > Yes perhaps on smaller trees, but that does not mean much. For > smaller trees and/or smaller patch series almost anything would > do. Yes, a smaller patch series, that is what I meant. Most quilt trees that I know about are in needed small. Andrews is the only one I know of that has gets as far as sucking in other quilt trees. > How about doing something like this, so that the user can record > the fixup information, especially with --dry-run patch? Then > the next round from the updated -mm tree the user would not have > to retype them again ("then..fi" part should be indented in the > final version, but I did not want indentation changes to > distract you): This might be a sane work flow. My imagination actually had the user making a copy of the quilt tree and editing it by hand. My --dry-run doesn't ask the question it just throws errors so --dry-run isn't quite the right name. So I guess with something like --dry-run there isn't a restart problem. The question is if we don't edit the patches themselves where do we put your author-fixup tag? .dotest? Eric