I'll repeat my suggestion that everyone poo-pooed: we can have the
mail list filters recognize patches, run filterdiff on them with our
prefered options, and attach the result as an additional attachment
(or link to some web directory).
I think it would be simple to do and would be happy to give it a go if
I can get the necessary access.
It doesn't solve *all* the problems since the committee still needs a
unified diff if he wants to take advantage of git's merge abilities.
I think this is actually all a red herring since it's pretty easy for
the reviewer to run filterdiff anyways. But having things be automatic
is still always easier than not.
--
Greg
On 26 May 2009, at 13:54, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 05/26/2009 01:39 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> On Monday 25 May 2009 20:58:59 Andres Freund wrote:
>>> and executing
>>> `git config --global diff.context.command "git-external-diff"`
>> We already knew that you could do it with a wrapper. But that
>> isn't the
>> answer we were looking for, because it will basically mean that 98%
>> of casual
>> contributors will get it wrong, and it will probably not work very
>> well on
>> Windows.
> It works on windows, linux, solaris (thats what I could get my hands
> on without bothering). I tested it - it works on any non ancient
> version of git. (Ancient in the sense, that git at that time didnt
> work properly on win anyway).
> And providing a 5-line wrapper download-ready surely makes it easier
> than figuring it out how to write one out of some git manpages.
>
> Also it allows at least those who prefer context diffs to use them
> easily when using git - that are the ones which seem to prefer using
> them most.
>
>> The goal is to get git-diff to do it itself.
> I do not disagree.
>
> Andres
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
