Re: [PATCH 1/3] Add git-send-email-script - tool to send emails from git-format-patch-script
Hi, Ryan Anderson wrote:
Since these emails are sent *very* fast, delivery order tends to be the
dominating factor in how they sort in your inbox, as they will all have
the same time. So that's a trifle annoying.
That's trivially fixable: just generate your own Date: header and
add a second for each email.
--
Matthias Urlichs | {M:U} IT Design @ m-u-it.de | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Disclaimer: The quote was selected randomly. Really. | http://smurf.noris.de
- -
Be careful whilst playing under the anvil tree.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe git in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [PATCH 1/3] Add git-send-email-script - tool to send emails from git-format-patch-script
On Sun, Jul 31, 2005 at 02:45:29AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: Ryan Anderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: All emails are sent as a reply to the previous email, making it easy to skip a collection of emails that are uninteresting. I understand why _some_ people consider this preferable, but wonder if this should have a knob to be tweaked. For example, I myself often find it very hard to read when a cascading thread goes very deep like this: [PATCH 0/9] cover [PATCH 1/9] first one [PATCH 2/9] second one [PATCH 3/9] third one in the series ... and prefer to see this instead (this assumes your MUA is half-way decent and lets you sort by subject): [PATCH 0/9] cover [PATCH 1/9] first one [PATCH 2/9] second one [PATCH 3/9] third one in the series ... In testing this, I think I figured out *why* the former is preferred - it guarantees the sorting when in the standard mode of order by date. Since these emails are sent *very* fast, delivery order tends to be the dominating factor in how they sort in your inbox, as they will all have the same time. So that's a trifle annoying. Yes, sorting by subject will fix it, but threaded + subject is actually something I'm not sure much of anything supports. (It's not instantly obvious how to do it in mutt, for example - though, admittedly, Mutt may very well have a way to do it.) I noticed this while testing my 2 new fixes - those will sent in a few seconds. -- Ryan Anderson sometimes Pug Majere - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe git in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [PATCH 1/3] Add git-send-email-script - tool to send emails from git-format-patch-script
Hi, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Also, I wonder if running lc() to downcase the local-part[*] is
safe/allowed/correct
mostly/no/no.
It's unlikely to be a real-life problem, but we still shouldn't do it.
--
Matthias Urlichs | {M:U} IT Design @ m-u-it.de | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Disclaimer: The quote was selected randomly. Really. | http://smurf.noris.de
- -
Amusements to virtue are like breezes of air to the flame -- gentle ones will
fan it, but strong ones will put it out.
-- David Thomas
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe git in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [PATCH 1/3] Add git-send-email-script - tool to send emails from git-format-patch-script
On Sun, Jul 31, 2005 at 07:52:42PM -0400, Ryan Anderson wrote:
On Sun, Jul 31, 2005 at 02:45:29AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Ryan Anderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
...
Also you seem to be losing the ordering in @to and @cc by the
use of uniquefying keys %to and keys %cc. I can not offhand
tell if it matters, but you probably would care, at least for
the primary recipients listed in @to array.
Well, it was kind of annoying to see the same email address appear 2-3
times in the email, because of the way I pull in all the relevant emails
from various places. So I really needed a way to cull the duplicates.
I don't believe ordering is really significant in To: or Cc: lines, for
really anyone. I could do soemthing like this, instead, I suppose:
my @clean_to = ();
my %dupe_check_to = ();
foreach my $to_entry (@to) {
if (!$dupe_check_to{Email::Valid-address($to_entry)}++) {
push @clean_to, $to_entry;
}
}
my $to = join(, , @clean_to);
I just like the first one a little better (though, I can't really pin
down why).
Or, more simply (if perl'y):
my %tmp;
@to = grep { ! $tmp{Email::Valid-address($_)}++ } @to;
...although I'd probably defensively localize the temporary var:
{
my %tmp;
@to = grep { ! $tmp{Email::Valid-address($_)}++ } @to;
}
--
Short-term expediency always fails in the long term.
-- The Preacher at Arrakeen
+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+
Noel Maddy [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe git in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [PATCH 1/3] Add git-send-email-script - tool to send emails from git-format-patch-script
On Mon, Aug 01, 2005 at 06:08:00PM -0400, Noel Maddy wrote:
On Sun, Jul 31, 2005 at 07:52:42PM -0400, Ryan Anderson wrote:
On Sun, Jul 31, 2005 at 02:45:29AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Ryan Anderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
...
Also you seem to be losing the ordering in @to and @cc by the
use of uniquefying keys %to and keys %cc. I can not offhand
tell if it matters, but you probably would care, at least for
the primary recipients listed in @to array.
Well, it was kind of annoying to see the same email address appear 2-3
times in the email, because of the way I pull in all the relevant emails
from various places. So I really needed a way to cull the duplicates.
I don't believe ordering is really significant in To: or Cc: lines, for
really anyone. I could do soemthing like this, instead, I suppose:
my @clean_to = ();
my %dupe_check_to = ();
foreach my $to_entry (@to) {
if (!$dupe_check_to{Email::Valid-address($to_entry)}++) {
push @clean_to, $to_entry;
}
}
my $to = join(, , @clean_to);
I just like the first one a little better (though, I can't really pin
down why).
Or, more simply (if perl'y):
my %tmp;
@to = grep { ! $tmp{Email::Valid-address($_)}++ } @to;
...although I'd probably defensively localize the temporary var:
{
my %tmp;
@to = grep { ! $tmp{Email::Valid-address($_)}++ } @to;
}
Duh. ENOCAFFEINE.
my %tmp;
@to = grep { ! $tmp-{$_}++ Email::Valid-address($_) } @to;
--
Short-term expediency always fails in the long term.
-- The Preacher at Arrakeen
+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+
Noel Maddy [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe git in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
--
The more people you rule over, the less an individual matters.
+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+
Noel Maddy [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe git in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [PATCH 1/3] Add git-send-email-script - tool to send emails from git-format-patch-script
Hi, Ryan Anderson wrote:
And yes, I did generate this thread with this script - so I have proof
that it works nicely.
It might make sense to create a Patch 0/N with a short explanation, and
have the actual patches be replies to that -- or to patch 1/N if that's
not necessary.
As it is, patch N hangs off patch N-1 in my email threading view, which
gets slightly cumbersome if N10.
--
Matthias Urlichs | {M:U} IT Design @ m-u-it.de | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Disclaimer: The quote was selected randomly. Really. | http://smurf.noris.de
- -
Nothing makes a person more productive than the last minute.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe git in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [PATCH 1/3] Add git-send-email-script - tool to send emails from git-format-patch-script
Oh, another thing. Could you refrain from doing quoted-printable when possible? Thanks. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe git in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [PATCH 1/3] Add git-send-email-script - tool to send emails from git-format-patch-script
On Sun, Jul 31, 2005 at 02:45:29AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Ryan Anderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
All emails are sent as a reply to the previous email, making it easy to
skip a collection of emails that are uninteresting.
I understand why _some_ people consider this preferable, but
wonder if this should have a knob to be tweaked.
Hmm, fair enough.
I'll send a few more patches in a minute that deal with the things in
this email but for now:
--chain-reply-to (or --no-chain-reply-to)
Will toggle between these two behaviors. (This will not be
prompted for by the ReadLine interface, btw.)
+# horrible hack of a script to send off a large number of email messages,
one after
+# each other, all chained together. This is useful for large numbers of
patches.
+#
+# Use at your own risk
Well, if it is Use at your own risk maybe it should stay
outside the official distribution for a while until it gets
safer ;-).
Heh. I missed some comments that I meant to clean up that were in
Greg's original script. One of the patches will clean up the comments.
+ my @fields = split /\s+/, $data;
+ my $ident = join( , @fields[0...(@fields-3)]);
Wouldn't s/.*// be easier than splitting and joining?
Most of GIT_COMMITTER_IDENT (and GIT_AUTHOR_IDENT) is use controllable,
except for the date section of it. I know we delimit that with
spaces, so the above is guaranteed to work unless we change the format
that git-var returns.
If I hope that nobody has done something like:
GIT_AUTHOR=Ryan Anderson
GIT_AUTHOR_EMAIL=[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I get more confusing results. (I suddenly have to think about what that
regular expression does in this case - and I'm pretty sure that the one
you gave would do bad things.)
Probably the best fix for this would be to take libgit.a, make a shared
library out of it, and then interface the Perl scripts directly with it
via a .xs module. I was thinking that I'd rather have direct access to
the git_ident* functions than calling out to git-var, anyway. Consider
that a plan for a revamp after the core seems to have settled down a bit
more.
+if (!defined $from) {
+ $from = $author || $committer;
+ 1 while (!defined ($_ = $term-readline(Who should the emails appear
to be from? ,
+ $from)));
Judging from your past patches, you seem to really like
statement modifiers[*]. While they _are_ valid Perl constructs,
it is extremely hard to read when used outside very simple
idiomatic use. Please consider rewriting the above and the like
using compound statements[*] (I am using these terms according
to the definition in perlsyn.pod). Remember, there are people
Perl is not their native language, but are intelligent enough to
be of great help fixing problems in programs you write in Perl.
To most of them, compound statements are more familiar, so try
to be gentle to them.
I copied this from another program of mine, and I'm *sure* I copied the
style directly from a ReadLine example. But, I can't find a current
example that says this is good, so, I'll fix this, too. It is rather
ugly. (The other uses of this style are... less bad, IMO, than this
abuse here.)
+ opendir(DH,$f)
+ or die Failed to opendir $f: $!;
+ push @files, map { +$f . / . $_ } grep !/^\.{1,2}$/,
+ sort readdir(DH);
Maybe skip potential subdirs while you are at it, something like this?
push @files, sort grep { -f $_ } map { $f/$_ } readdir(DH)
Good point. One one hand I'd say, Let it break for people who do
strange things like that, but I'll make it safer anyway.
(Someone is going to reply and ask for it to recurse into subdirectories
now. Maybe Andrew Morton would find that useful with his rather massive
collection of patches in -mm kernels. But that's a feature for next
week.)
+ my $pseudo_rand = int (rand(4200));
+ $message_id = [EMAIL PROTECTED];
+ print new message id = $message_id\n;
I doubt this hardcoded foobar.com is a good idea. Did you mean
to print it, by the way?
I'll convert this to something that is based off the $from address
instead. It's probably better that way, anyway.
+ $to{lc(Email::Valid-address($_))}++ for (@to);
+ my $to = join(,, keys %to);
Is this the culprit that produced this mechanical-looking line?
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED],git@vger.kernel.org
No, that line was exactly what I put into the readline entry.
Interestingly enough, you do not seem to do it for the From:
line.
From: Ryan Anderson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Also you seem to be losing the ordering in @to and @cc by the
use of uniquefying keys %to and keys %cc. I can not offhand
tell if it matters, but you probably would care, at least for
the primary recipients listed in @to array.
Well, it was kind of annoying to see the same email address appear 2-3
times in the email,
