From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <kyle@kyleam.com>
Received: from mp2.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:1004:224b::])
	(using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits))
	by ms1.migadu.com with LMTPS
	id GKHxMc2wwWWXwgAAe85BDQ:P1
	(envelope-from <kyle@kyleam.com>)
	for <larch@inbox.kyleam.com>; Tue, 06 Feb 2024 05:08:46 +0100
Received: from mta0.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:1004:224b::])
	(using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits))
	by mp2.migadu.com with LMTPS
	id GKHxMc2wwWWXwgAAe85BDQ
	(envelope-from <kyle@kyleam.com>)
	for <larch@inbox.kyleam.com>; Tue, 06 Feb 2024 05:08:45 +0100
X-Report-Abuse: Please report any abuse attempt to abuse@migadu.com and include these headers.
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kyleam.com; s=key1;
	t=1707192525;
	h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id:
	 to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type:
	 in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references;
	bh=p3Q/p3HU7SPl8wYsmm7/gx2wrO/kBfBZQZdP0+KWR0c=;
	b=sX9BdigAGdxcfT6ud5KdWFwO3nwiRGSqlslmYm8ETsIo7OsIoS0cj4kQaoIltJ8j8lbOIj
	C+NdYRNd+HvCbpo/EzKQQnxx5+UpBMfY1z9kDb6KL3nGzZfgOIPYEA51iflWa0sIzrsCz2
	VjrVewAYkpOWNkYrCcGqDQWnim5aV7ix0vnGR1PVt7DgEEqvVqibBdn5y889GLuyCz39b/
	UfwB5vG9WYHdwd8nS9LnTJnAqqOE1SHXGxeZTSIqryJvVaIwHF2MpSxqEk0b+Oklh7RcPL
	D9RaFrl+JQ75Py8kx31FSdGy5HpMJvf4Inevpo7a4BUppbYU5Wv7/gmrgY53YA==
From: Kyle Meyer <kyle@kyleam.com>
To: Leo <git@relevant-information.com>
Cc: piem@inbox.kyleam.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] *-am-ready-mbox: Don't require PATCH prefix
In-Reply-To: <87sf272ojs.fsf@>
References: <87ttmo57js.fsf@kyleam.com>
Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2024 23:08:41 -0500
Message-ID: <87eddqnsja.fsf@kyleam.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_OUT
X-TUID: 5uq7GITowKxe

[ adding piem inbox back to cc  ]

Leo writes:

> Kyle Meyer <kyle@kyleam.com> writes:
>>
>> This change makes it more likely that a piem-am caller invokes 'git
>> am' on something that's not a valid patch, but in that case 1) the
>> output buffer gives a reasonable error
>>
> The only comment I have is that running piem-am with this patch on a
> non-patch buffer (and selecting a repo to apply it on) will create a new
> branch and put git in a state of failing to apply a patch.  You need to
> clean it up by deleting the branch and running `git am --abort` in the
> repository.  This seems reasonable to me.  Both are easy to do, and is
> what you would expect to happen if you run `git-am` with a broken patch
> (well not really the branch, but I think that's fine).

Right, that is worth spelling out.  Thanks.