From: Karl Hasselström Date: Thu, 04 Oct 2007 17:39:29 GMT Subject: Re: stgit: editing description of patch Message-ID: <20071004173929.GD21717@diana.vm.bytemark.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <9e4733910710040945l2335f3d7le6f45510640d3a6e@mail.gmail.com> On 2007-10-04 12:45:17 -0400, Jon Smirl wrote: > On 10/4/07, Karl Hasselström wrote: > > > I've never thought of the patch names as anything that would make > > sense to export from a repository (like reflogs), so using the > > first line of the commit message for mail subject (like git does) > > always seemed like a no-brainer. But then I don't have any > > experience using quilt or any related tool. > > Why are the patch name and the short description independent > variables? Wouldn't it make more sense to treat these as a single > unified item? If I rename the patch it would automatically edit the > first line of the description, etc... I guess Catalin would have to answer that -- it's "always" been like that. But one obvious problem are patches with identical messages -- just today I created a series of seven patches that all had "debug" for a message. Another is that you usually want descriptive commit messages, but may want short and easy-to-type patch names. > When importing a patch from a saved email, stg should strip all the > email headers out of the description. I have to manually fix that > up. Do you do "stg import -M"? That's for importing one or more patches contained in an mbox. Without the -M, I think the default is to expect plain diff input. -- Karl Hasselström, kha@treskal.com www.treskal.com/kalle