linux-kernel - Re: git-send-email

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20090213092737.GO5038@1wt.eu>
Date:	Fri, 13 Feb 2009 10:27:37 +0100
From:	Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:	Junio C Hamano <junio@...ox.com>,
	Lennart Sorensen <lsorense@...lub.uwaterloo.ca>,
	Ingo Oeser <ioe-lkml@...eria.de>,
	L-K <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: git-send-email

Hi Peter,

On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 10:22:38AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-02-12 at 18:16 -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> > lsorense@...lub.uwaterloo.ca (Lennart Sorensen) writes:
> > 
> > > On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 06:25:34PM +0100, Ingo Oeser wrote:
> > >> No, they are great, if you like to skip over a topic, you are not
> > >> interested in at all!
> > >> 
> > >> If you don't like it, just switch off thread in your mailer and
> > >> don't force this on everybody else!
> > >
> > > Actually if (as apparently many people seem to manage to do) you have a
> > > single starting email, with all the patches as replies to that first
> > > email, it looks a lot better, and is much easier to follow.
> > >
> > > Seperate threads would be bad.
> > >
> > > foobar patch 0 (usually a summary/overview)
> > > +-foobar patch 1
> > > +-foobar patch 2
> > > +-foobar patch 3
> > > +-foobar patch 4
> > > +-foobar patch 5
> > >
> > > is much nicer than
> > >
> > > foobar patch 0
> > > +-foobar patch 1
> > >   +-foobar patch 2
> > >     +-foobar patch 3
> > >       +-foobar patch 4
> > >         +-foobar patch 5
> > >
> > > which seems to be what git does itself.
> > 
> > I personally prefer the former, but as you hopefully all found out by now,
> > the choice between these two is just the matter of personal taste, and
> > there is no clear majority.
> > 
> > The default will not going to change.
> 
> Its a matter of usability, the inf deep chain git does by default
> renders the result unusable. Fact is I usually skip over patch series
> posted that way, simply because its too much of a bother.
> 
> If you can't be bothered with usability of your project, then so be it.
> Maybe all those rants on how unusable git is have a point after all.

While your last comment seems a bit excessive to me, I agree with you
about the threading problem. I have to turn threads off to read some
of these long mails because the subject does not fit in my terminal,
and most of the time I only see just something like '[PATCH' which is
pretty useless.

The former mode (as used by Greg when he posts his huge stable series)
is a lot more convenient. Also, if one mail gets dropped for whatever
reason in between, the threading is not broken.

Regards,
Willy

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/