From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp12.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:306:f42::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms12 with LMTPS id GHZsN/C4Z2K7SAAAsNZ9tg (envelope-from ) for ; Tue, 26 Apr 2022 09:18:40 +0000 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:8:6d80::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp12.migadu.com with LMTPS id 4CoEN/C4Z2KFCwAAauVa8A (envelope-from ) for ; Tue, 26 Apr 2022 11:18:40 +0200 Received: from mail-oo1-xc36.google.com (mail-oo1-xc36.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::c36]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AFBCF1A33E for ; Tue, 26 Apr 2022 11:18:37 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-oo1-xc36.google.com with SMTP id o2-20020a4ad142000000b0035e6578a91dso1071051oor.7 for ; Tue, 26 Apr 2022 02:18:37 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :mime-version; bh=mS7psCw/4TMe0wDi6oyxuSmwY5m+ixUVPc8MiS8fvEE=; b=lNadDZ8RM54abDTI7nCpjI956m+6J+4hBwyfDD+Eb1vUS8mNX1hwCFf7QfUSFCd+yS tqkPhMkg/cUepqDyoyv5ElBrDgpWbr/7Jefm133hW8ISIJRd26PKyTJAHvefVfXiTE/e C72FZh6xDB/hdr74aHERNN7kzsZApF9VfHK2WU/F84bjtwQKBmsraCdbjXoHtiSUK4Q1 SE4jhDfXIw15POozyYvKcYd3MpF2teDjmroUV8npr2xuV57lIrU2LpN73rwND3PS0glI A+eBjMDPIN+gdaB30spwFjCCru1LE8+Tb/QPSgAUpQoMNxsigz8y69I1CsBL6kpJMdrm zQVg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:mime-version; bh=mS7psCw/4TMe0wDi6oyxuSmwY5m+ixUVPc8MiS8fvEE=; b=fxkSX8irgMUsR/gjcPj2xFnZQMyyxcJZeBM9vOWD3Bapd7kklDwCHSE47PGv9hegGB BABFJm2/L/Opeh64FN4+dqJVtrbuK5v4Vp1KN7AuUNpmtNE9KDLHe0cC3AJLamouqv7E 4svKpSQgaGizA0pquU9wL67+CiMY49oxAdU7intRT7HKPk6Xi458lvXw2vVKjFNk2kr8 v+dDBQ3sMfSTMTQcnuyeL6yvCIfE4LY0SZx5R4jwCDmPrUWzc5Em8umyS4GnG5tbvlYZ GMS7VPcGs9I77fwILJB8KECem6/p2y/jKEP1RUt7Mz7DveUPpp/obXtu++gmfA2WHlnt W+6w== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5312lifjExl6s9FMJRo3Agt0rlIAtnUMrrsF3W/Sy0s3Amjqs8pS mpRDXE/sT41iYgI+c9PvqGgtR/WO5gNQtA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzFD0fkg/gw0sl9nrKL9zSF74Jmju/sNw8Dlq7udTLQ6nmlKIhv5darZe61ttRYyzpVKilEkA== X-Received: by 2002:a4a:4554:0:b0:333:3180:157 with SMTP id y81-20020a4a4554000000b0033331800157mr7799176ooa.52.1650964716610; Tue, 26 Apr 2022 02:18:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([208.110.84.210]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id x16-20020a056808145000b00323371f6935sm4728207oiv.15.2022.04.26.02.18.35 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 26 Apr 2022 02:18:35 -0700 (PDT) From: Ihor Radchenko To: Kyle Meyer Cc: piem@inbox.kyleam.com Subject: Applying the same patch multiple times (was: [FR] Support multiple repositories associated with the same ML) In-Reply-To: <87pml6871p.fsf@kyleam.com> References: <87v8uyncpl.fsf@localhost> <87pml6871p.fsf@kyleam.com> Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2022 17:19:28 +0800 Message-ID: <8735i0urq7.fsf@localhost> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; none X-Migadu-Scanner: scn1.migadu.com X-TUID: QG0n6PSOIgcZ Kyle Meyer writes: > ;; TODO: Decide how to deal with inboxes that map to more than one > ;; coderepo. This is important to support for people that want to > ;; use a catchall inbox for small projects which they don't think > ;; (yet) need a dedicated address. > (defcustom piem-inboxes nil > > I'll plan to take a look at this soon (within the next week or two). Thanks! I also noticed one minor annoyance when I return to work on the previously applied patch. My starting point is the patch-containing email. Then, I run piem-am and use the default automatically generated branch. Expected behaviour: Silently switch to the already existing branch unless that branch had modifications to the patch in the email. In the latter case, either throw an error or show the changes interactively. Observed behaviour: Because the branch already exists and the patch is already applied, git am throws an error. I think a more useful approach would be something like: 1. piem creates a throwaway branch and apply the patch in the email 2. piem rebases the existing branch onto that throwaway branch That way, I can start working on a patch from email, possibly add some followup commits and still be able to return to this WIP branch starting from the patch email. Best, Ihor