"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 12:48:22PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: >> >> > Repost, sorry about the noise. >> > >> > On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 05:36:45PM +0200, Johannes Schindelin wrote: >> >> Hi Michael, >> >> >> >> On Mon, 11 Apr 2016, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: >> >> >> >> > So far I only see examples of adding footers. If that's all we can think >> >> > up, why code in all this genericity? >> >> >> >> Because as far as I can see, the only benefitor of your patches would be >> >> you. >> >> >> >> Ciao, >> >> Johannes >> > >> > This seems unlikely. Just merging the patches won't benefit me directly >> > - I have maintained them in my tree for a couple of years now with very >> > little effort. For sure, I could benefit if they get merged and then >> > someone improves them further - that was the point of posting them - but >> > then I'm not the only benefitor. >> > >> > The workflow including getting acks for patches by email is not handled >> > well by upstream git right now. It would surprise me if no one uses it >> > if it's upstream, as you seem to suggest. But maybe most people moved >> > on and just do pull requests instead. >> >> I doubt I would use this in its current form myself. >> >> Patch series I receive are all queued on their own separate topic >> branches, and having to switch branches only to create a fake empty >> commit to record received Acked-by and Reviewed-by is a chore that >> serves only half of what needs to be done. > > Interesting. An empty commit would be rather easy to create on any > branch, not just the current one, using git-commit-tree. This "modify a branch without checking-it out" makes me think of "git notes". It may make sense to teach "git rebase -i" to look for notes in rebased commits and append them to the commit message when applying. Just an idea, not necessarily a good one ;-). > Does it sounds interesting if I teach > git ack to get an active branch as a parameter? I think "ack" is not a good name for this feature: you use it to append "Acked-by", but it can be used to append any trailer (for example, Reviewed-by: would make complete sense too). I think using a better name would help the discussion (to remove the "it's my use-case" biais). Perhaps "append"? -- Matthieu Moy http://www-verimag.imag.fr/~moy/ -- 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