Re: [PATCH v2 14/19] tree-diff: rework diff_tree interface to be sha1 based

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Mar 28, 2014, 18:36 UTC
Message-ID: <xmqqtxai9nmq.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com>
In-Reply-To: <5335B57B.4080606@kdbg.org>

Johannes Sixt <j6t@kdbg.org> writes:

Show 23 quoted lines

> Am 28.03.2014 18:06, schrieb Junio C Hamano:
>> Johannes Sixt <j.sixt@viscovery.net> writes:
>> 
>>> Am 3/27/2014 19:48, schrieb Junio C Hamano:
>>>>> From: Kirill Smelkov <kirr@mns.spb.ru>
>>>>> Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2014 20:21:46 +0400
>>>>> ...
>>>>
>>>> By the way, in general I do not appreciate people lying on the Date:
>>>> with an in-body header in their patches, either in the original or
>>>> in rerolls.
>>>
>>> format-patch is not very cooperative in this aspect. When I prepare a
>>> patch series with format-patch, I find myself editing out the Date: line
>>> from all patches it produces again and again. :-(
>> 
>> I am not sure what you mean.  If you are pasting the format-patch
>> output into an editor your MUA is using to receive the body of the
>> message from you, you would remove all the non-body lines, not just
>> Date: but Subject: and From:, no?
>
> Correct. So I should add that my gripe is about when I want to send a
> patch series with git-send-email that was prepared with git-format-patch.

Hmph. Don't you get fresh timestamps for your messages in such a case, ignoring whatever is at the beginning of the input files?

My reading of git-send-email is:

 * "$time = time - scalar $#files" prepares the initial "timestamp",
   so that running two "git send-email" back to back will give
   timestamps to the series sent out by the first invocation that
   are older than the ones the second series will get;

 * "sub send_message" calls "format_2822_time($time++)" to send the
   first message with that initial "timestamp", incrementing the
   timestamps by 1 second intervals (without having to actually wait
   1 second in between messages) for each patch.