On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 10:10:42AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:

> Stefan Beller <sbel...@google.com> writes:
> > So as a discussion starter:
> > * Should git am skip a patch 00/XX automatically ?
> No.  My preference is to add "--initial-skip=<N>", though.
> When I receive a patch series to reroll another series, I somehow
> know and verify that earlier N patches have not changed, I detach
> the HEAD at the last unchanged commit from the previous round and
> apply the remainder of the new series, so that I can preserve the
> author timestamps of earlier steps from the previous series.  By
> the time I "know and verify" where the first step that was updated,
> I have a full series in a single mbox; having "--initial-skip=<N>"
> would help with that use case, too, and "skipping the first" is a
> narrow special case of giving N=1.

For my workflow, it is not about "initial skip", but rather just "skip
emails that don't have patches in them at all". My MUA makes it easy to
tag a whole thread (or subthread), cover letter and discussion included,
and then dump it all to git-am.

And I think that would be the same for a public-inbox workflow (if it
learns to grab sub-threads; otherwise you end up with earlier iterations
of the series attached to the same thread).

That is solving a different problem than you, though, where you want to
skip actual patches because you know they are unchanged.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to