# Re: [RFC] Patches exchange is bad?

2 messages from 2005-08-17 to 2005-08-17. Participants: Marco Costalba, Martin Langhoff.
Thread: https://gitlist.dev/t/1553

## Marco Costalba, 2005-08-17 08:27

Subject: Re: [RFC] Patches exchange is bad?
Message-ID: <20050817082709.28135.qmail@web26301.mail.ukl.yahoo.com>
URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/20050817082709.28135.qmail%40web26301.mail.ukl.yahoo.com

```
Daniel Barkalow wrote:

>>2) Practical: The round trip git-format-patch + git-applymbox is the logical and
>>natural way to reach this goal or, also in this case, I intend to stretch some tools,
>>designed for one thing, for something else?
>
>
>I'd guess that git-diff-tree + git-apply (without the rest of the
>scripting) would be more effective when you're not doing anything with the
>intermediate files, since it saves doing a bunch of formatting and
>parsing.
>
>
It would be surely better, but I need to import also the original subject and
description. I can use git-diff-tree --pretty -p for the patch creation, but this
format is not compatible with git-apply* scripts, and the git command git-apply does
not import subject + description info.

Of course I can feed proper subject and description to git-commit but I would like 
to find something less intrusive as possible, ie. one command for patch export, one 
command for patch import.

Thanks
Marco


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

```

## Martin Langhoff, 2005-08-17 09:07

Subject: Re: [RFC] Patches exchange is bad?
Message-ID: <46a038f90508170207578b1c0@mail.gmail.com>
URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/46a038f90508170207578b1c0%40mail.gmail.com
In-Reply-To: <20050817082709.28135.qmail@web26301.mail.ukl.yahoo.com>

```
On 8/17/05, Marco Costalba <mcostalba@yahoo.it> wrote:
> Of course I can feed proper subject and description to git-commit but I would like
> to find something less intrusive

I don't know if it helps, but I think that StGIT is what you are
looking for, not only because you have more tools to deal with
patches, but also because patches that are in the 'stack' are actually
really malleable. You can edit and reedit the patch w its commit msg
and all, commit it to the stack, and reedit it again later. It only
becomes immutable when you commit to the underlying git repo.

cheers,


martin

```