Hi Pratyush, On Mon, 7 Oct 2019, Pratyush Yadav wrote: > On 06/10/19 10:27PM, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > > Hi Pratyush, > > > > On Mon, 7 Oct 2019, Pratyush Yadav wrote: > > > > > Anyway, GitGitGadget solves a large part of the problem. It > > > eliminates the need for using git-send-email, and it even shows you > > > the replies received on the list. I honestly think it is a great > > > tool, and it gives people a very good alternative to using > > > git-send-email. > > > > GitGitGadget is just a workaround. Not even complete. Can't be > > complete, really. Because problems. It has much of the same problems > > of `git send-email`: it's a one-way conversation. Code is not > > discussed in the right context (which would be a worktree with the > > correct commit checked out). The transfer is lossy (email is designed > > for human-readable messages, not for transferring machine-readable > > serialized objects). Matching original commits and/or branches to the > > ones on the other side is tedious. Any interaction requires switching > > between many tools. Etc > > > > > One feature that would make it complete would be the ability to > > > reply to review comments. > > > > And how would that work, exactly? How to determine *which* email to > > respond to? *Which* person to reply to? *What* to quote? > > GGG already shows replies to the patches as a comment. On GitHub you can > "Quote reply" a comment, which quotes the entire comment just like your > MUA would. The option can be found by clicking the 3 dots on the top > right of a comment. > > Then you can write your reply there, and the last line would be > '/reply', which would make GGG send that email as a reply. You would > need to strip the first line from the reply because GGG starts the reply > with something like: > > > [On the Git mailing list](https://public-inbox.org/git/xmqq7e5l9zb1.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx), Junio C Hamano wrote ([reply to this](https://github.com/gitgitgadget/gitgitgadget/wiki/ReplyToThis)): > > GGG also adds 3 backticks before and after the reply content, so those > would need to be removed too. > > Does this sound like a sane solution? Here are two real life examples where an unsuspecting GitGitGadget user expected GitGitGadget to mirror replies _to_ the Git mailing list: https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git/pull/451#issuecomment-555044068 and https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git/pull/451#issuecomment-555077933 Neither of them include the line with the link. Just to throw a bit of real life into the discussion... Ciao, Dscho
