Re: cg-mkpatch use case

From: Petr Baudis <pasky@suse.cz>
Date: May 2, 2006, 21:57 UTC
Message-ID: <20060502215703.GK27689@pasky.or.cz>
In-Reply-To: <44570E8E.5070402@itaapy.com>

Hi,

Dear diary, on Tue, May 02, 2006 at 09:47:26AM CEST, I got a letter where Belmar-Letelier <luis@itaapy.com> said that...

Show 10 quoted lines

> I have 3 questions about cg-mkpatch
> 
> 1. I've receive a file "xxx.patch", this content came from
>   cg-mkpatch, but I can't apply it.
>   For example if I try git-am I get::
> 
>     $ git-am --signoff xxx.patch
>     Patch does not have a valid e-mail address.
> 
>   What is the Cogito way to apply the result of "cg-mkpatch"

  cg-mkpatch is a very old tool which has been long neglected and
not many people actually use it nowadays, I believe. You can apply it
back using cg-patch (or even patch itself, or git-apply if you are
lucky), but it won't automagically extract the commit message and
authorship information.

> 2. What are the difference between usecases with "cg-mkpatch"
>   and "git-format-patch" ?

  git-format-patch outputs stuff in the mailbox format while cg-mkpatch
outputs it in a more "human readable" (well, but quite historical)
format, but really, you probably want to use git-format-patch in almost
every case. In the (probably relatively near) future, cg-mkpatch might
become merely a git-format-patch wrapper.

> 3. It seem that if a commit as a binary file they are no way to manage
>   it by email patches. Any plan about this in Cogito ?

  Not any clear plans. I will welcome patches but it is not high
priority for me currently.

-- 
				Petr "Pasky" Baudis
Stuff: http://pasky.or.cz/
Right now I am having amnesia and deja-vu at the same time.  I think
I have forgotten this before.