Return-Path: X-Original-To: python-list@python.org Delivered-To: python-list@mail.python.org X-Spam-Status: OK 0.000 X-Spam-Evidence: '*H*': 1.00; '*S*': 0.00; 'cpython': 0.05; 'tool,': 0.07; 'mercurial': 0.09; 'patches': 0.09; 'received:80.91': 0.09; 'received:80.91.229': 0.09; 'received:gmane.org': 0.09; 'received:list': 0.09; 'rfc': 0.09; 'subject:2.7': 0.09; 'survive': 0.09; 'jan': 0.11; 'commit': 0.15; '822': 0.16; 'authors,': 0.16; 'authors.': 0.16; 'headers,': 0.16; 'received:80.91.229.3': 0.16; 'received:plane.gmane.org': 0.16; 'reedy': 0.16; 'retained.': 0.16; 'subject:non': 0.16; 'workflows,': 0.16; 'wrote:': 0.16; 'this:': 0.23; 'tried': 0.24; 'patch': 0.24; 'header:In-Reply-To:1': 0.24; 'sort': 0.25; 'header :User-Agent:1': 0.26; 'header:X-Complaints-To:1': 0.26; 'chris': 0.26; 'information;': 0.29; 'starts': 0.29; "i'm": 0.30; 'code': 0.30; 'option': 0.31; 'generally': 0.32; 'but': 0.36; 'created': 0.36; 'to:addr:python-list': 0.36; 'subject:?': 0.36; 'pm,': 0.36; 'subject:: ': 0.37; 'received:org': 0.37; 'files': 0.38; 'subject:-': 0.39; 'rather': 0.39; 'to:addr:python.org': 0.40; 'some': 0.40; 'information': 0.63; 'manner': 0.69; 'transmitting': 0.84; 'received:fios.verizon.net': 0.91 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: python-list@python.org From: Terry Reedy Subject: Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed? Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2015 00:45:11 -0400 References: <55ab2b73$0$1664$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <622d0c72-5946-4067-84cd-255907688630@googlegroups.com> <3c265a7b-4a7c-4709-a553-f3bcbe218b70@googlegroups.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: pool-98-114-97-173.phlapa.fios.verizon.net User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.1.0 In-Reply-To: X-BeenThere: python-list@python.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20+ Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion list for the Python programming language List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Newsgroups: comp.lang.python Message-ID: Lines: 21 NNTP-Posting-Host: 2001:888:2000:d::a6 X-Trace: 1437453952 news.xs4all.nl 2846 [2001:888:2000:d::a6]:49411 X-Complaints-To: abuse@xs4all.nl Path: csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!news.stben.net!border1.nntp.ams1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed8.news.xs4all.nl!newsgate.cistron.nl!newsgate.news.xs4all.nl!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:94268 On 7/20/2015 11:33 PM, Chris Angelico wrote: > It's also the manner of workflow. If you want to accept patches and > have them acknowledged to their original authors, the patches need to > carry metadata identifying the authors. Notice how the patch files start straight in with content. There's no > authorship information retained. > > By comparison, a patch created with 'git format-patch' and applied > with 'git am' starts with RFC 822 headers, provides a commit message, > and generally is intended as a way of transmitting a *commit*, rather > than simply some changes. I'm not overly familiar with Mercurial > workflows, but I think 'hg export' and 'hg import' give the same sort > of information; I tried on CPython and got this: hg has an option to produce git-format patches. However, they do not work with the Rietveld code review tool, and so are discouraged. I do not know if the extra information would survive an hg commit. -- Terry Jan Reedy