[RFC] just an (stupid) idea when creating a new branch

Hi GIT folks.

I'm a complete newbie on git development so excuse me if this idea is completely stupid.

Would it be possible to let the user stick a short explanation on what a branch is supposed to implement during its creation.

That is

$ git branch --topic "Implement a killer feature \

Then it would be possible with another command to consult this topic after a while. And even more useful, when generating the patch set with the following git command

$ git-format-patch -n HEAD master

it uses the topic branch to generate as first patch a summary of the patch serie. That is

"""
Subject: [PATCH 0/n] Implement a killer feature

This This set of patches add the foo feature to GIT. """

Is it useless ?

Thanks

Francis

moreau francis wrote:

It would be possible when/if branch and remotes config would migrate to .git/config. Currently too many I think relies on refs/heads being simple sha1 of "top" commit.

Hi,

On Sat, 8 Jul 2006, Jakub Narebski wrote:

But it does not need a change of existing practice at all! Just add the information provided by --topic as branch."pathname".description to the config. And make format-patch aware of that.

Ciao, Dscho

Johannes Schindelin wrote:

And make tools remove stale descriptions. I sometimes rename branches "by hand", as currently there is I think no tool for this...

By the way, did this series of patches (adding support for branch and remotes configuretion to config file) made into 'next', 'master' or even 'pu', or after some discussion it stalled?

Hi,

On Sun, 9 Jul 2006, Jakub Narebski wrote:

The latter. Some parts are there (the remote configuration made it in AFAIK) but things like the default remote(s) to fetch / push are not.

Ciao, Dscho

On 7/8/06, Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com> wrote:

It is possible to add a message (and more) to a tag creating a tag object. FWIK this is not allowed for the other refs.

Why there is this (artifical?) difference between tags and the other kind of refs?

   Marco

Hi,

On Sun, 9 Jul 2006, Marco Costalba wrote:

The tag message is nothing else than a commit message. The (artificial-but-on-purpose) difference is that you are not supposed to change a tag ref, whereas a regular ref pointing to a commit is _expected_ to point to some other commit in the future.

Ciao, Dscho

  Hi,

Dear diary, on Sun, Jul 09, 2006 at 04:33:53PM CEST, I got a letter where Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> said that...

  huh?

  The tag message is a message in the "freeform" part of the tag object,
but disregarding the format similiraties, it has really nothing to do
with a commit message. (Also, commit messages don't tend to be commonly
PGP signed. ;-)

Hi,

On Mon, 10 Jul 2006, Petr Baudis wrote:

Marco was talking about an "artificial difference", which means technical issues. From a technical viewpoint, the tag message is _exactly_ the same as a commit message.

Hth, Dscho

Hello!

On Sat, 2006-07-08 at 15:55 +0000, moreau francis wrote:

Just for your information, this is already implemented by StGIT. For instance, .git/patches/master/description contains the description of the "master" branch.

If you run "stg branch --list", the branch descriptions will be listed. I'm not aware of any commands to change the description.

well I'm using plain git for now. And it doesn't seem to be a high level
 feature.
 
 Another point to this would be to show this set of patch and its summary
 threaded under a mailer. I use thunderbird, and it's possible to use threaded
 view which is very convinient. I don't know how it works, but see the set of
 patchs like:
 
 [PATCH 0/3] Summary of the set
                     |
                    + [PATCH 1/4] blababla
                     + [PATCH 2/4] another useful commit
                    + [PATCH 3/4] ...
 
 would be great !
 
 Francis
 
 PS: please CC me when answering.

moreau francis <francis_moreau2000@yahoo.fr> writes:

Doing the cover letter is primarily a job of the patch submitter, and I think git-send-email has some support for that.