From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp2 ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms12 with LMTPS id wCjKBugVBGDgdQAAsNZ9tg (envelope-from ) for ; Sun, 17 Jan 2021 10:48:08 +0000 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp2 with LMTPS id GOU5MuYVBGAZEQAAB5/wlQ (envelope-from ) for ; Sun, 17 Jan 2021 10:48:06 +0000 Received: from mail.yoctocell.xyz (h87-96-130-155.cust.a3fiber.se [87.96.130.155]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B4C999403A5 for ; Sun, 17 Jan 2021 10:48:06 +0000 (UTC) From: Xinglu Chen DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=yoctocell.xyz; s=mail; t=1610880484; bh=+LyCk+UFWpf0lCxx5NLgts9nFLoWSqpm29/uqzQkkmc=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date; b=q145eZ5DoSAWZ/vdYgd9OPqAKvbcsWwuSaEONHdmWxSM5aXuHSUyJzCHrKwHHS6Gf ynLM0j1yLPjVxBt/TFpSU3UpHlSl1qzyRME86a6Hx0d5KJWeS9yYNOdXtMzmfXAHot /oFXWMi2TbnxR/wY9869skKoEgVz1mJqxYVD0PyU= To: Kyle Meyer Cc: piem@inbox.kyleam.com Subject: Re: Merge projects? In-Reply-To: <87y2gs374y.fsf@kyleam.com> References: <87y2gs374y.fsf@kyleam.com> Date: Sun, 17 Jan 2021 11:48:03 +0100 Message-ID: <87pn23kffg.fsf@yoctocell.xyz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_IN X-Migadu-Spam-Score: -4.00 Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; none X-Migadu-Queue-Id: B4C999403A5 X-Spam-Score: -4.00 X-Migadu-Scanner: scn1.migadu.com X-TUID: nrrfBXqWchQD On Sat, Jan 16 2021, Kyle Meyer wrote: > The second feature (sending patches) isn't something I had really > imagined supporting in piem. That's not because I don't think people > would find it useful; based on discussions on Magit's issue tracker > about git-send-email [2], I believe there's a good amount of interest > in such functionality. However, I think what particular workflow will > work for a person is likely to vary a lot and depend on several > factors, to the point where a large number of users will end up > creating their own tailored process [3]. My current thinking is that > it makes sense to have dedicated packages that add support for > specific workflows, and that this functionality is orthogonal to > functionality for applying patches. Good point, it seems like everyone has a slightly different workflow when using git-format-patch and git-send-email. > So, I don't know. I'm not sure piem is a good home for "send patches" > functionality. Yeah, it is probably better for something like Magit or VC to offer this functionality. > My primary interest with piem is public-inbox, and there's some very > exciting work upstream on a local client [5] that I plan to support. This looks exciting, I would love to see an interface for lei, this would make it much faster than using Gnus over NNTP. >[3] To use my odd workflow as an example: I prefer to call > git-format-patch and track the cover letter and patches in a > dedicated branch. For rerolls of a series, I overwrite the branch, > and use its reflog to carry over details I want from the previous > iterations (e.g., bits of the cover letter, remarks after the commit > message). Then I just send it out with a plain git-send-email, > sometimes with the --in-reply-to and --cc's coming from > notmuch-show-stash-git-send-email. Thanks for explaining your workflow and pointing out `notmuch-show-stash-git-send-email`, I will definitely make use of it in the future. -- Xinglu Chen