GNU bug report logs - #57400
29.0.50; Support sending patches from VC directly

Previous Next

Full log

Message #277 received at 57400 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Philip Kaludercic <philipk <at> posteo.net>
To: Juri Linkov <juri <at> linkov.net>
Cc: Robert Pluim <rpluim <at> gmail.com>, 57400 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
 Antoine Kalmbach <ane <at> iki.fi>
Subject: Re: bug#57400: 29.0.50; Support sending patches from VC directly
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2022 12:44:26 +0000

Juri Linkov <juri <at> linkov.net> writes:

>> Again, regarding `crm-separator' I don't know if this is a value that
>> people change or not (perhaps it should be changed to a defconst).
>
> At least, it's not defcustom, so it's not intended for user customization.

Sure, but could a completion frontend decide to change it?

>> I can also imagine that the initial input outside of a log buffer ought
>> to just be the last commit.
>
> Depends on whether this is one of the most popular workflows.

Seems popular to me, you make a change and want to submit it. The issue
I have noticed is that vc doesn't allow for an easy way to detect the
latest revision.  The best I can do is the last revision for the file
associated with the current buffer.

>>> Additional question: shouldn't the behavior of
>>> vc-prepare-patches-separately=nil be equivalent to
>>> vc-prepare-patches-separately=t when only one revision is given?  Both
>>> cases create just one mail.  So when vc-prepare-patches-separately is
>>> nil, could it extract the subject from the single revision?  Or maybe
>>> vc-prepare-patches-separately should support a new customization value
>>> for this?
>>
>> Yes, but the formatting is different.  In the one case you attach a
>> patch to a regular message, while in the other case the message is
>> prepared in such a way that (at least when using Git) the entire message
>> is a valid patch, where we can use "git am".
>
> Hmm, I tried both variants, and still not sure which is better
> for the 1-patch case.  However, what I definitely suggest to do is
> to get rid of recursive-edit, that also Robert noticed on emacs-devel.
> recursive-edit is too fragile for modal editing, because such
> commands as keyboard-escape-quit can easily break it.  Without
> recursive-edit you can just create all mail buffers at once.
> Then after sending one mail, its buffer gets buried, and the
> next mail buffer will be shown instead, etc.

I think you are right, I'll do that and push the changes.

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.