On 03/06/2017 11:46 AM, Glenn Morris wrote: > Ludovic Courtès wrote: > >> Hello! >> >> Leo Famulari <l...@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
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
