On 02/14/2013 01:55 PM, Matthieu Moy wrote: > Michael Haggerty <mhagger@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > >> On 02/13/2013 03:56 PM, Matthieu Moy wrote: >> >>> Installation troubles: >>> >>> I had an old python installation (Red Hat package, and I'm not root), >>> that did not include the email.utils package, so I couldn't use my >>> system's python. I found no indication about python version in README, >>> so I installed the latest python by hand, just to find out that >>> git-multimail wasn't compatible with Python 3.x. 2to3 can fix >>> automatically a number of 3.x compatibility issues, but not all of them >>> so I gave up and installed Python 2.7. >> >> What version of Python was it that caused problems? > > Python 2.4.3, installed with RHEL 5.9. > >> I just discovered that the script wouldn't have worked with Python >> 2.4, where "email.utils" used to be called "email.Utils". > > Indeed, "import email.Utils" works with this Python. > >> But I pushed a fix to GitHub: >> >> ddb1796660 Accommodate older versions of Python's email module. > > Not sufficient, but I added a pull request that works for me with 2.4. > >>> @@ -835,6 +837,17 @@ class ReferenceChange(Change): >>> for line in self.expand_lines(NO_NEW_REVISIONS_TEMPLATE): >>> yield line >>> >>> + if adds and self.showlog: >>> + yield '\n' >>> + yield 'Detailed log of added commits:\n\n' >>> + for line in read_lines( >>> + ['git', 'log'] >>> + + self.logopts >>> + + ['%s..%s' % (self.old.commit, self.new.commit,)], >>> + keepends=True, >>> + ): >>> + yield line >>> + >>> # The diffstat is shown from the old revision to the new >>> # revision. This is to show the truth of what happened in >>> # this change. There's no point showing the stat from the >>> >> >> Thanks for the patch. I like the idea, but I think the implementation >> is incorrect. Your code will not only list new commits but will also >> list commits that were already in the repository on another branch >> (e.g., if an existing feature branch is merged into master, all of the >> commits on the feature branch will be listed). (Or was that your >> intention?) > > I did not think very carefully about this case, but the behavior of my > code seems sensible (although not uncontroversial): it's just showing > the detailed log for the same commits as the summary at the top of the > email. I have no personnal preferences. I guess it depends a lot on what logopts are used. If the user configures logopts to emit full patches, then the repeated reporting of the same commits would cause a big increase in the bulk of notification emails. But if the logopts are set to just emit a brief summary (e.g., author and log message), then a bit of repetition might be acceptable. But since I wouldn't use this feature, I don't personally have a preference. >> But even worse, it will fail to list commits that were >> added at the same time that a branch was created (e.g., if I create a >> feature branch with a number of commits on it and then push it for the >> first time). > > Right. > >> Probably the Push object has to negotiate with its constituent >> ReferenceChange objects to figure out which one is responsible for >> summarizing each of the commits newly added by the push (i.e., the ones >> returned by push.get_new_commits(None)). > > I updated the pull request with a version that works for new branches, > and takes the list of commits to display from the call to > get_new_commits (which were already there for other purpose). Then, it > essentially calls "git log --no-walk $list_of_sha1s". > > This should be better. I will check it out. Thanks! Michael -- Michael Haggerty mhagger@xxxxxxxxxxxx http://softwareswirl.blogspot.com/ -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html