On Tue, Sep 08, 2009 at 03:23:50PM +0800, Paul Wise wrote: > On Tue, Sep 8, 2009 at 7:53 AM, Pierre Habouzit <madco...@madism.org> wrote: > > On Mon, Sep 07, 2009 at 10:30:14PM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > >> Anyway, I'd rather wait some time until people have tried using this > >> format before deciding if we must make some special case due to > >> git format-patch. > > > > It's not a special case. Kernel people, git people, gnome people, X.org > > people, all can cherry-pick patches and format-patch them away. If you > > ask them to add one missing header like the actual source or commid-id > > they took the patch from, they'll probably do it (I would at least). If > > you ask to rewrite the full stuff, then really, "go to hell" will > > probably be the (sane) answer you'll get. > > What format do the other DVCS systems use for patch export?
IIRC hg generates mails pretty much like git nowadays, and the `hg import` feature works mostly like git does: "You can import a patch straight from a mail message. Even patches as attachments work (to use the body part, it must have type text/plain or text/x-patch). From and Subject headers of email message are used as default committer and commit message. All text/plain body parts before first diff are added to commit message." I'm not used to bzr at all, but I would be surprised it does sth _very_ different. -- ·O· Pierre Habouzit ··O madco...@debian.org OOO http://www.madism.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
