From: ebiederm@xmission•com (Eric W. Biederman)
To: Jeff King <peff@peff•net>
Cc: Martin Mares <mj@ucw•cz>, Andreas Ericsson <ae@op5•se>,
david@lang•hm, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox•com>,
git@vger•kernel.org
Subject: Re: send-email sending shallow threads by default
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2009 19:03:27 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <m1bpsxq074.fsf@fess.ebiederm.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090217192855.GB15625@coredump.intra.peff.net> (Jeff King's message of "Tue\, 17 Feb 2009 14\:28\:55 -0500")
Jeff King <peff@peff•net> writes:
> On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 10:06:18AM +0100, Martin Mares wrote:
>
>> > There's no need to have the date field be set to the time the mails
>> > were actually sent though. AFAIR, they get the AUTHOR_DATE now, and
>> > I doubt more than one commit can be authored every second.
>>
>> Is it really so? Last time I have used git send-email, they got the
>> current date. It was in Git 1.5.5, though, so it is possible that it
>> has changed since then.
>
> send-email does write a new date header. Which is actually desirable,
> IMHO, because otherwise rebased patches would get sent with their
> original date, which might very well long in the past (and not only is
> that confusing, but it would probably trip spam filters).
Can we ensure that all of the messages sent differ in date by 1 second?
Keeping them in order for anyone who looks at the transmit date.
I know at one point I started using --change-reply-to because of the problem
of threads showing up in the wrong order, and making it hard to read.
Eric
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-02-20 3:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 91+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-02-15 21:31 [RFC - draft] List of proposed future changes that are backward incompatible Junio C Hamano
2009-02-15 21:48 ` Junio C Hamano
2009-02-15 22:56 ` Jakub Narebski
2009-02-15 23:39 ` Junio C Hamano
2009-02-15 23:20 ` Heikki Orsila
2009-02-16 0:04 ` disallowing push to currently checked-out branch Jeff King
2009-02-16 1:33 ` david
2009-02-16 1:47 ` david
2009-02-16 1:30 ` Julian Phillips
2009-02-16 4:01 ` Jeff King
2009-02-16 8:33 ` Daniel Barkalow
2009-02-16 8:51 ` Junio C Hamano
2009-02-16 10:17 ` Sergio Callegari
2009-02-16 13:58 ` Jeff King
2009-02-16 17:13 ` Sergio Callegari
2009-02-16 17:33 ` Matthieu Moy
2009-02-16 17:43 ` Johannes Schindelin
2009-02-16 18:48 ` Jay Soffian
2009-02-16 20:02 ` Johannes Schindelin
2009-02-16 21:12 ` Jay Soffian
2009-02-16 21:15 ` Johannes Schindelin
2009-02-16 22:28 ` Jay Soffian
2009-02-16 22:52 ` Jeff King
2009-02-17 5:53 ` Jay Soffian
2009-02-17 11:28 ` PUSH_HEAD, was " Johannes Schindelin
2009-02-17 17:29 ` Jay Soffian
2009-02-17 19:48 ` Jeff King
2009-02-17 22:20 ` Junio C Hamano
2009-02-17 22:42 ` Jay Soffian
2009-02-17 22:54 ` Johannes Schindelin
2009-02-16 19:24 ` Sergio Callegari
2009-02-16 20:09 ` Johannes Schindelin
2009-02-16 21:42 ` Jay Soffian
2009-02-17 0:07 ` Sergio Callegari
2009-02-17 0:18 ` Johannes Schindelin
2009-02-17 0:41 ` Sergio Callegari
2009-02-17 0:56 ` Johannes Schindelin
2009-02-17 1:18 ` Junio C Hamano
2009-02-17 0:57 ` Junio C Hamano
2009-02-16 21:43 ` Junio C Hamano
2009-02-16 22:43 ` Jeff King
2009-02-16 23:23 ` Junio C Hamano
2009-02-17 0:23 ` Jeff King
2009-02-17 0:43 ` Junio C Hamano
2009-02-17 1:29 ` Jeff King
2009-02-16 3:50 ` Jeff King
2009-02-16 5:05 ` david
2009-02-16 4:05 ` Jeff King
2009-02-16 5:18 ` david
2009-02-16 4:37 ` Jeff King
2009-02-16 5:55 ` david
2009-02-16 5:06 ` Jeff King
2009-02-16 10:53 ` Johannes Schindelin
2009-02-16 10:50 ` dashed commands, was " Johannes Schindelin
2009-02-15 23:53 ` [RFC - draft] List of proposed future changes that are backward incompatible david
2009-02-15 23:01 ` Johannes Schindelin
2009-02-15 23:36 ` Junio C Hamano
2009-02-16 0:14 ` david
2009-02-15 23:18 ` Johannes Schindelin
2009-02-16 0:38 ` david
2009-02-16 0:29 ` Junio C Hamano
2009-02-16 10:23 ` Johannes Schindelin
2009-02-16 15:33 ` david
2009-02-16 14:40 ` Sverre Rabbelier
2009-02-16 0:02 ` disallowing push to currently checked-out branch Jeff King
2009-02-16 10:06 ` Sergio Callegari
2009-02-15 23:01 ` [RFC - draft] List of proposed future changes that are backward incompatible Jakub Narebski
2009-02-15 23:15 ` Johannes Schindelin
2009-02-15 23:38 ` Jakub Narebski
2009-02-16 0:35 ` david
2009-02-16 0:07 ` send-email sending shallow threads by default Jeff King
2009-02-16 0:09 ` Pieter de Bie
2009-02-16 2:43 ` Jeff King
2009-02-16 2:55 ` Brian Gernhardt
2009-02-16 9:56 ` Wincent Colaiuta
2009-02-16 7:55 ` SZEDER Gábor
2009-02-16 10:38 ` Martin Mares
2009-02-17 8:34 ` Andreas Ericsson
2009-02-17 9:06 ` Martin Mares
2009-02-17 19:28 ` Jeff King
2009-02-20 3:03 ` Eric W. Biederman [this message]
2009-02-20 3:26 ` Jeff King
2009-02-20 4:13 ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-02-17 8:30 ` Andreas Ericsson
2009-02-16 1:27 ` [RFC - draft] List of proposed future changes that are backward incompatible Sitaram Chamarty
2009-02-16 8:04 ` Björn Steinbrink
2009-02-16 8:49 ` Junio C Hamano
2009-02-16 9:07 ` Björn Steinbrink
2009-02-16 2:42 ` [RFC - draft #2] " Junio C Hamano
2009-02-16 3:20 ` Jeff King
2009-02-16 21:10 ` Jakub Narebski
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=m1bpsxq074.fsf@fess.ebiederm.org \
--to=ebiederm@xmission$(echo .)com \
--cc=ae@op5$(echo .)se \
--cc=david@lang$(echo .)hm \
--cc=git@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox$(echo .)com \
--cc=mj@ucw$(echo .)cz \
--cc=peff@peff$(echo .)net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox