From: Alex Chiang Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2009 18:46:29 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] git-send-email --expand-aliases Message-ID: <20091124184629.GB27418@ldl.fc.hp.com> In-Reply-To: * Catalin Marinas : > 2009/11/24 Karl Wiberg : > > On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 1:45 AM, Alex Chiang wrote: > >> * Junio C Hamano : > >> > I imagine the internal implementation of stg mail would work > >> > something like: > >> > > >> >     prepare messages to send out > >> >     call git-send-email and have it send them > >> > > >> > What am I missing? > >> > >> Your suggestion is much better. I'll take a closer look at StGit and > >> see how feasible it is. > >> > >> Unless Catalin has strong objections? > > > > I think that sounds like a splendid idea. It would be interesting to > > see just how thin a wrapper around git send-email (and format-patch) > > stg mail could become, without sacrificing features anyone actually > > uses. The main complication could be stg mail's templates. > > > > Catalin, how wedded are you to those? ;-) > > Historically, I think "stg mail" was implemented before git-send-email > existed. It was also a good way to check who's using stgit for sending > patches :-) (the message-id). Heh, I like looking at that too. ;) > If there are no other users of the stg mail templates, I'm happy to > let them go. Otherwise, we can replace the sendmail with > git-send-email in stgit. > > It seems that git-format-patch and git-send-email have all the > features stgit has. We would need to keep some of the interactive > options like --edit-cover and --edit-patches since we use > git-format-patch and git-send-email in one go. So, is this something you (or Karl) plan on doing? Or should I take a crack at it? I don't mind doing the work, but it will definitely take me longer than it would take you. All I was doing was trying to get stg mail to understand my mutt aliases. ;) Thanks, /ac