{"thread":{"id":"4805","subject":"[RFC] just an (stupid) idea when creating a new branch","startedAt":"2006-07-08T15:55:47Z","lastAt":"2006-07-09T22:12:29Z","messageCount":12,"participants":["moreau francis","Jakub Narebski","Johannes Schindelin","Pavel Roskin","Marco Costalba","Junio C Hamano","Petr Baudis"],"isPatch":false,"patchVersion":null,"patchTotal":null},"messages":[{"id":"23417","messageId":"20060708155547.73054.qmail@web25814.mail.ukl.yahoo.com","threadId":"4805","inReplyTo":null,"subject":"[RFC] just an (stupid) idea when creating a new branch","fromName":"moreau francis","fromEmail":"francis_moreau2000@yahoo.fr","sentAt":"2006-07-08T15:55:47Z","receivedAt":"2006-07-08T15:55:47Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"francis_moreau2000@yahoo.fr","avatar":null},"body":"Hi GIT folks.\n\nI'm a complete newbie on git development so excuse me if\nthis idea is completely stupid.\n\nWould it be possible to let the user stick a short explanation\non what a branch is supposed to implement during its creation.\n\nThat is\n\n$ git branch --topic \"Implement a killer feature \\\n> This set of patches add the foo feature to GIT\" mybranch master\n\nThen it would be possible with another command to consult this topic\nafter a while. And even more useful, when generating the patch set\nwith the following git command\n\n$ git-format-patch -n HEAD master\n\nit uses the topic branch to generate as first patch a summary\nof the patch serie. That is\n\n\"\"\"\nSubject: [PATCH 0/n] Implement a killer feature\n\nThis This set of patches add the foo feature to GIT.\n\"\"\"\n\nIs it useless ?\n\nThanks\n\nFrancis\n"},{"id":"23442","messageId":"e8p8pj$jk3$2@sea.gmane.org","threadId":"4805","inReplyTo":"20060708155547.73054.qmail@web25814.mail.ukl.yahoo.com","subject":"Re: [RFC] just an (stupid) idea when creating a new branch","fromName":"Jakub Narebski","fromEmail":"jnareb@gmail.com","sentAt":"2006-07-08T21:41:31Z","receivedAt":"2006-07-08T21:41:31Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"jnareb@gmail.com","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/2706?v=4"},"body":"moreau francis wrote:\n\n> Hi GIT folks.\n> \n> I'm a complete newbie on git development so excuse me if\n> this idea is completely stupid.\n> \n> Would it be possible to let the user stick a short explanation\n> on what a branch is supposed to implement during its creation.\n\nIt would be possible when/if branch and remotes config would migrate\nto .git/config. Currently too many I think relies on refs/heads being\nsimple sha1 of \"top\" commit.\n\n-- \nJakub Narebski\nWarsaw, Poland\nShadeHawk on #git\n"},{"id":"23443","messageId":"Pine.LNX.4.63.0607090011000.29667@wbgn013.biozentrum.uni-wuerzburg.de","threadId":"4805","inReplyTo":"e8p8pj$jk3$2@sea.gmane.org","subject":"Re: [RFC] just an (stupid) idea when creating a new branch","fromName":"Johannes Schindelin","fromEmail":"johannes.schindelin@gmx.de","sentAt":"2006-07-08T22:15:16Z","receivedAt":"2006-07-08T22:15:16Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"johannes.schindelin@gmx.de","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/127790?v=4"},"body":"Hi,\n\nOn Sat, 8 Jul 2006, Jakub Narebski wrote:\n\n> moreau francis wrote:\n> \n> > Hi GIT folks.\n> > \n> > I'm a complete newbie on git development so excuse me if\n> > this idea is completely stupid.\n> > \n> > Would it be possible to let the user stick a short explanation\n> > on what a branch is supposed to implement during its creation.\n> \n> It would be possible when/if branch and remotes config would migrate\n> to .git/config. Currently too many I think relies on refs/heads being\n> simple sha1 of \"top\" commit.\n\nBut it does not need a change of existing practice at all! Just add the \ninformation provided by --topic as branch.\"pathname\".description to the \nconfig. And make format-patch aware of that.\n\nCiao,\nDscho\n"},{"id":"23448","messageId":"1152415640.2103.10.camel@dv","threadId":"4805","inReplyTo":"20060708155547.73054.qmail@web25814.mail.ukl.yahoo.com","subject":"Re: [RFC] just an (stupid) idea when creating a new branch","fromName":"Pavel Roskin","fromEmail":"proski@gnu.org","sentAt":"2006-07-09T03:27:20Z","receivedAt":"2006-07-09T03:27:20Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"proski@gnu.org","avatar":null},"body":"Hello!\n\nOn Sat, 2006-07-08 at 15:55 +0000, moreau francis wrote:\n> Hi GIT folks.\n> \n> I'm a complete newbie on git development so excuse me if\n> this idea is completely stupid.\n> \n> Would it be possible to let the user stick a short explanation\n> on what a branch is supposed to implement during its creation.\n\nJust for your information, this is already implemented by StGIT. For\ninstance, .git/patches/master/description contains the description of\nthe \"master\" branch.\n\nIf you run \"stg branch --list\", the branch descriptions will be listed.\nI'm not aware of any commands to change the description.\n\n-- \nRegards,\nPavel Roskin\n"},{"id":"23453","messageId":"e5bfff550607082354g62e99216gc72b07055762de3a@mail.gmail.com","threadId":"4805","inReplyTo":"e8p8pj$jk3$2@sea.gmane.org","subject":"Re: [RFC] just an (stupid) idea when creating a new branch","fromName":"Marco Costalba","fromEmail":"mcostalba@gmail.com","sentAt":"2006-07-09T06:54:53Z","receivedAt":"2006-07-09T06:54:53Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"mcostalba@gmail.com","avatar":null},"body":"On 7/8/06, Jakub Narebski wrote:\n> moreau francis wrote:\n>\n> > Hi GIT folks.\n> >\n> > I'm a complete newbie on git development so excuse me if\n> > this idea is completely stupid.\n> >\n> > Would it be possible to let the user stick a short explanation\n> > on what a branch is supposed to implement during its creation.\n>\n> It would be possible when/if branch and remotes config would migrate\n> to .git/config. Currently too many I think relies on refs/heads being\n> simple sha1 of \"top\" commit.\n>\n\nIt is possible to add a message (and more) to a tag creating a tag\nobject. FWIK this is not allowed for the other refs.\n\nWhy there is this (artifical?) difference between tags and the other\nkind of refs?\n\n\n Marco\n"},{"id":"23465","messageId":"20060709094808.74906.qmail@web25811.mail.ukl.yahoo.com","threadId":"4805","inReplyTo":"1152415640.2103.10.camel@dv","subject":"Re : [RFC] just an (stupid) idea when creating a new branch","fromName":"moreau francis","fromEmail":"francis_moreau2000@yahoo.fr","sentAt":"2006-07-09T09:48:08Z","receivedAt":"2006-07-09T09:48:08Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"francis_moreau2000@yahoo.fr","avatar":null},"body":"\n> Just for your information, this is already implemented by StGIT. For\n> instance, .git/patches/master/description contains the description of\n> the \"master\" branch.\n\nwell I'm using plain git for now. And it doesn't seem to be a high level\n feature.\n \n Another point to this would be to show this set of patch and its summary\n threaded under a mailer. I use thunderbird, and it's possible to use threaded\n view which is very convinient. I don't know how it works, but see the set of\n patchs like:\n \n [PATCH 0/3] Summary of the set\n |\n + [PATCH 1/4] blababla\n + [PATCH 2/4] another useful commit\n + [PATCH 3/4] ...\n \n would be great !\n \n Francis\n \n PS: please CC me when answering.\n"},{"id":"23470","messageId":"7v8xn3nkwo.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net","threadId":"4805","inReplyTo":"20060709094808.74906.qmail@web25811.mail.ukl.yahoo.com","subject":"Re: Re : [RFC] just an (stupid) idea when creating a new branch","fromName":"Junio C Hamano","fromEmail":"junkio@cox.net","sentAt":"2006-07-09T10:16:07Z","receivedAt":"2006-07-09T10:16:07Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"gitster@pobox.com","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/54884?v=4"},"body":"moreau francis writes:\n\n> I don't know how it works, but see the set of\n> patchs like:\n> \n> [PATCH 0/3] Summary of the set\n> |\n> + [PATCH 1/4] blababla\n> + [PATCH 2/4] another useful commit\n> + [PATCH 3/4] ...\n> \n> would be great !\n\nDoing the cover letter is primarily a job of the patch\nsubmitter, and I think git-send-email has some support for that.\n"},{"id":"23481","messageId":"Pine.LNX.4.63.0607091632070.29667@wbgn013.biozentrum.uni-wuerzburg.de","threadId":"4805","inReplyTo":"e5bfff550607082354g62e99216gc72b07055762de3a@mail.gmail.com","subject":"Re: [RFC] just an (stupid) idea when creating a new branch","fromName":"Johannes Schindelin","fromEmail":"johannes.schindelin@gmx.de","sentAt":"2006-07-09T14:33:53Z","receivedAt":"2006-07-09T14:33:53Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"johannes.schindelin@gmx.de","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/127790?v=4"},"body":"Hi,\n\nOn Sun, 9 Jul 2006, Marco Costalba wrote:\n\n> It is possible to add a message (and more) to a tag creating a tag\n> object. FWIK this is not allowed for the other refs.\n> \n> Why there is this (artifical?) difference between tags and the other\n> kind of refs?\n\nThe tag message is nothing else than a commit message. The \n(artificial-but-on-purpose) difference is that you are not supposed to \nchange a tag ref, whereas a regular ref pointing to a commit is _expected_ \nto point to some other commit in the future.\n\nCiao,\nDscho\n"},{"id":"23488","messageId":"e8rcu5$je5$2@sea.gmane.org","threadId":"4805","inReplyTo":"Pine.LNX.4.63.0607090011000.29667@wbgn013.biozentrum.uni-wuerzburg.de","subject":"Re: [RFC] just an (stupid) idea when creating a new branch","fromName":"Jakub Narebski","fromEmail":"jnareb@gmail.com","sentAt":"2006-07-09T17:04:32Z","receivedAt":"2006-07-09T17:04:32Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"jnareb@gmail.com","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/2706?v=4"},"body":"Johannes Schindelin wrote:\n\n\n> On Sat, 8 Jul 2006, Jakub Narebski wrote:\n> \n>> moreau francis wrote:\n>> \n>>> Would it be possible to let the user stick a short explanation\n>>> on what a branch is supposed to implement during its creation.\n>> \n>> It would be possible when/if branch and remotes config would migrate\n>> to .git/config. Currently too many I think relies on refs/heads being\n>> simple sha1 of \"top\" commit.\n> \n> But it does not need a change of existing practice at all! Just add the \n> information provided by --topic as branch.\"pathname\".description to the \n> config. And make format-patch aware of that.\n\nAnd make tools remove stale descriptions. I sometimes rename branches \"by\nhand\", as currently there is I think no tool for this...\n\nBy the way, did this series of patches (adding support for branch and\nremotes configuretion to config file) made into 'next', 'master' or even\n'pu', or after some discussion it stalled?\n\n-- \nJakub Narebski\nWarsaw, Poland\nShadeHawk on #git\n"},{"id":"23489","messageId":"Pine.LNX.4.63.0607092106530.29667@wbgn013.biozentrum.uni-wuerzburg.de","threadId":"4805","inReplyTo":"e8rcu5$je5$2@sea.gmane.org","subject":"Re: [RFC] just an (stupid) idea when creating a new branch","fromName":"Johannes Schindelin","fromEmail":"johannes.schindelin@gmx.de","sentAt":"2006-07-09T19:09:28Z","receivedAt":"2006-07-09T19:09:28Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"johannes.schindelin@gmx.de","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/127790?v=4"},"body":"Hi,\n\nOn Sun, 9 Jul 2006, Jakub Narebski wrote:\n\n> By the way, did this series of patches (adding support for branch and\n> remotes configuretion to config file) made into 'next', 'master' or even\n> 'pu', or after some discussion it stalled?\n\nThe latter. Some parts are there (the remote configuration made it in \nAFAIK) but things like the default remote(s) to fetch / push are not.\n\nCiao,\nDscho\n"},{"id":"23495","messageId":"20060709220116.GT29115@pasky.or.cz","threadId":"4805","inReplyTo":"Pine.LNX.4.63.0607091632070.29667@wbgn013.biozentrum.uni-wuerzburg.de","subject":"Re: [RFC] just an (stupid) idea when creating a new branch","fromName":"Petr Baudis","fromEmail":"pasky@suse.cz","sentAt":"2006-07-09T22:01:16Z","receivedAt":"2006-07-09T22:01:16Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"pasky@ucw.cz","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/18439?v=4"},"body":" Hi,\n\nDear diary, on Sun, Jul 09, 2006 at 04:33:53PM CEST, I got a letter\nwhere Johannes Schindelin said that...\n> On Sun, 9 Jul 2006, Marco Costalba wrote:\n> \n> > It is possible to add a message (and more) to a tag creating a tag\n> > object. FWIK this is not allowed for the other refs.\n> > \n> > Why there is this (artifical?) difference between tags and the other\n> > kind of refs?\n> \n> The tag message is nothing else than a commit message.\n\n huh?\n\n The tag message is a message in the \"freeform\" part of the tag object,\nbut disregarding the format similiraties, it has really nothing to do\nwith a commit message. (Also, commit messages don't tend to be commonly\nPGP signed. ;-)\n\n-- \n\t\t\t\tPetr \"Pasky\" Baudis\nStuff: http://pasky.or.cz/\nSnow falling on Perl. White noise covering line noise.\nHides all the bugs too. -- J. Putnam\n"},{"id":"23496","messageId":"Pine.LNX.4.63.0607100011060.29667@wbgn013.biozentrum.uni-wuerzburg.de","threadId":"4805","inReplyTo":"20060709220116.GT29115@pasky.or.cz","subject":"Re: [RFC] just an (stupid) idea when creating a new branch","fromName":"Johannes Schindelin","fromEmail":"johannes.schindelin@gmx.de","sentAt":"2006-07-09T22:12:29Z","receivedAt":"2006-07-09T22:12:29Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"johannes.schindelin@gmx.de","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/127790?v=4"},"body":"Hi,\n\nOn Mon, 10 Jul 2006, Petr Baudis wrote:\n\n> Hi,\n> \n> Dear diary, on Sun, Jul 09, 2006 at 04:33:53PM CEST, I got a letter\n> where Johannes Schindelin said that...\n> > On Sun, 9 Jul 2006, Marco Costalba wrote:\n> > \n> > > It is possible to add a message (and more) to a tag creating a tag\n> > > object. FWIK this is not allowed for the other refs.\n> > > \n> > > Why there is this (artifical?) difference between tags and the other\n> > > kind of refs?\n> > \n> > The tag message is nothing else than a commit message.\n> \n> huh?\n> \n> The tag message is a message in the \"freeform\" part of the tag object,\n> but disregarding the format similiraties, it has really nothing to do\n> with a commit message. (Also, commit messages don't tend to be commonly\n> PGP signed. ;-)\n\nMarco was talking about an \"artificial difference\", which means technical \nissues. From a technical viewpoint, the tag message is _exactly_ the same \nas a commit message.\n\nHth,\nDscho\n"}]}