GNU bug report logs - #25969
guix-patches debbugs appears to mangle patches

Previous Next

Package: guix;

Reported by: Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name>

Date: Sat, 4 Mar 2017 22:56:01 UTC

Severity: normal

Tags: notabug

Done: ludo <at> gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès)

Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.

To add a comment to this bug, you must first unarchive it, by sending
a message to control AT debbugs.gnu.org, with unarchive 25969 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 25969 AT debbugs.gnu.org in the normal way.

Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.

View this report as an mbox folder, status mbox, maintainer mbox


Report forwarded to bug-guix <at> gnu.org:
bug#25969; Package guix. (Sat, 04 Mar 2017 22:56:01 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name>:
New bug report received and forwarded. Copy sent to bug-guix <at> gnu.org. (Sat, 04 Mar 2017 22:56:01 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name>
To: bug-guix <at> gnu.org
Subject: guix-patches debbugs appears to mangle patches
Date: Sat, 4 Mar 2017 17:54:56 -0500
Git has a simple workflow for using email, with `git send-email` and
`git am`.

The guix-patches debbugs thing causes a regression in this workflow by
rewriting the commit messages to include the debbugs ticket number.

So, a commit that begins with this:

gnu: gitolite: Fix shebangs in hooks.

... becomes this:

bug#25966: [PATCH 2/2] gnu: gitolite: Fix shebangs in hooks.

Am I missing something, or is debbugs really rewriting the patches?




Information forwarded to bug-guix <at> gnu.org:
bug#25969; Package guix. (Sun, 05 Mar 2017 11:26:02 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #8 received at 25969 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: ng0 <contact.ng0 <at> cryptolab.net>
To: Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name>
Cc: 25969 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#25969: guix-patches debbugs appears to mangle patches
Date: Sun, 5 Mar 2017 12:34:13 +0000
On 17-03-04 17:54:56, Leo Famulari wrote:
> Git has a simple workflow for using email, with `git send-email` and
> `git am`.
> 
> The guix-patches debbugs thing causes a regression in this workflow by
> rewriting the commit messages to include the debbugs ticket number.
> 
> So, a commit that begins with this:
> 
> gnu: gitolite: Fix shebangs in hooks.
> 
> ... becomes this:
> 
> bug#25966: [PATCH 2/2] gnu: gitolite: Fix shebangs in hooks.
> 
> Am I missing something, or is debbugs really rewriting the patches?
> 
> 
> 

Possibly. Though I see some people started to just attach the git
format-patch patches.
Maybe we should look at / ask other projects how they deal with this for
debbugs?





Information forwarded to bug-guix <at> gnu.org:
bug#25969; Package guix. (Sun, 05 Mar 2017 11:29:03 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #11 received at 25969 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: ng0 <contact.ng0 <at> cryptolab.net>
To: Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name>
Cc: 25969 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#25969: guix-patches debbugs appears to mangle patches
Date: Sun, 5 Mar 2017 12:37:29 +0000
On 17-03-04 17:54:56, Leo Famulari wrote:
> Git has a simple workflow for using email, with `git send-email` and
> `git am`.
> 
> The guix-patches debbugs thing causes a regression in this workflow by
> rewriting the commit messages to include the debbugs ticket number.
> 
> So, a commit that begins with this:
> 
> gnu: gitolite: Fix shebangs in hooks.
> 
> ... becomes this:
> 
> bug#25966: [PATCH 2/2] gnu: gitolite: Fix shebangs in hooks.
> 
> Am I missing something, or is debbugs really rewriting the patches?
> 
> 
> 

885227386855e446e653d958c38b6bbcfc2a24ca and the patch afterwards was
sent with git send-email (after I was assigned an issue-id) and if Kei
didn't fix it, they were not altered in subject etc.




Information forwarded to bug-guix <at> gnu.org:
bug#25969; Package guix. (Mon, 06 Mar 2017 10:17:01 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #14 received at 25969 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: ludo <at> gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès)
To: Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name>
Cc: 25969 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, help-debbugs <at> gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#25969: guix-patches debbugs appears to mangle patches
Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2017 11:16:09 +0100
Hello!

Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name> skribis:

> The guix-patches debbugs thing causes a regression in this workflow by
> rewriting the commit messages to include the debbugs ticket number.
>
> So, a commit that begins with this:
>
> gnu: gitolite: Fix shebangs in hooks.
>
> ... becomes this:
>
> bug#25966: [PATCH 2/2] gnu: gitolite: Fix shebangs in hooks.
>
> Am I missing something, or is debbugs really rewriting the patches?

Good question.  Maybe Glenn and others at help-debbugs have an idea?

Thanks,
Ludo’.




Information forwarded to bug-guix <at> gnu.org:
bug#25969; Package guix. (Mon, 06 Mar 2017 17:47:03 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #17 received at 25969 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Glenn Morris <rgm <at> gnu.org>
To: ludo <at> gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès)
Cc: 25969 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, help-debbugs <at> gnu.org,
 Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name>
Subject: Re: bug#25969: guix-patches debbugs appears to mangle patches
Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2017 12:46:31 -0500
Ludovic Courtès wrote:

> Hello!
>
> Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name> skribis:
>
>> The guix-patches debbugs thing causes a regression in this workflow by
>> rewriting the commit messages to include the debbugs ticket number.
>>
>> So, a commit that begins with this:
>>
>> gnu: gitolite: Fix shebangs in hooks.
>>
>> ... becomes this:
>>
>> bug#25966: [PATCH 2/2] gnu: gitolite: Fix shebangs in hooks.
>>
>> Am I missing something, or is debbugs really rewriting the patches?
>
> Good question.  Maybe Glenn and others at help-debbugs have an idea?

I think it's over the top to describe this as "mangling" or "rewriting"
patches. The system relies on adding a bug number to the subject, so
that replies to the maintainer address can be associated with the right
bug. I don't see any prospect of this changing. If you are using a tool
that is sensitive to the subject line in emails, I can only suggest
using eg a trivial sed command to take out the bug number before passing
the mail to your tool.




Information forwarded to bug-guix <at> gnu.org:
bug#25969; Package guix. (Mon, 06 Mar 2017 17:56:02 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #20 received at 25969 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eric Blake <eblake <at> redhat.com>
To: Glenn Morris <rgm <at> gnu.org>, Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 25969 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, help-debbugs <at> gnu.org,
 Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name>
Subject: Re: bug#25969: guix-patches debbugs appears to mangle patches
Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2017 11:54:56 -0600
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
On 03/06/2017 11:46 AM, Glenn Morris wrote:
> Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> 
>> Hello!
>>
>> Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name> skribis:
>>
>>> The guix-patches debbugs thing causes a regression in this workflow by
>>> rewriting the commit messages to include the debbugs ticket number.
>>>
>>> So, a commit that begins with this:
>>>
>>> gnu: gitolite: Fix shebangs in hooks.
>>>
>>> ... becomes this:
>>>
>>> bug#25966: [PATCH 2/2] gnu: gitolite: Fix shebangs in hooks.
>>>
>>> Am I missing something, or is debbugs really rewriting the patches?
>>
>> Good question.  Maybe Glenn and others at help-debbugs have an idea?
> 
> I think it's over the top to describe this as "mangling" or "rewriting"
> patches. The system relies on adding a bug number to the subject, so
> that replies to the maintainer address can be associated with the right
> bug. I don't see any prospect of this changing. If you are using a tool
> that is sensitive to the subject line in emails, I can only suggest
> using eg a trivial sed command to take out the bug number before passing
> the mail to your tool.

'git am' already knows how to strip anything inside one or more [text]
prefix of the subject. I don't know how hard it would be to convince the
GNU debbugs instance to output '[bug#25969] ' instead of its current
'bug#25969: ' (and of course to also recognize both spellings on input,
when checking for existing mails in reply to existing bugs), but such a
tweak would play nicer with a git patch workflow.

-- 
Eric Blake   eblake redhat com    +1-919-301-3266
Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, attachment)]

Added tag(s) notabug. Request was from ludo <at> gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) to control <at> debbugs.gnu.org. (Fri, 05 May 2017 18:30:02 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

bug closed, send any further explanations to 25969 <at> debbugs.gnu.org and Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name> Request was from ludo <at> gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) to control <at> debbugs.gnu.org. (Fri, 05 May 2017 18:30:02 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

bug archived. Request was from Debbugs Internal Request <help-debbugs <at> gnu.org> to internal_control <at> debbugs.gnu.org. (Sat, 03 Jun 2017 11:24:06 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

This bug report was last modified 6 years and 300 days ago.

Previous Next


GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.