From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.9 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 755781F4C0 for ; Tue, 29 Oct 2019 01:39:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728415AbfJ2Bj0 (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Oct 2019 21:39:26 -0400 Received: from injection.crustytoothpaste.net ([192.241.140.119]:55212 "EHLO injection.crustytoothpaste.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727931AbfJ2Bj0 (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Oct 2019 21:39:26 -0400 Received: from camp.crustytoothpaste.net (unknown [IPv6:2001:470:b978:101:b610:a2f0:36c1:12e3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by injection.crustytoothpaste.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2F09F60443; Tue, 29 Oct 2019 01:39:23 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=crustytoothpaste.net; s=default; t=1572313164; bh=qRCnarv/GrUj9V5mn/zem3l2zNaFb+cQ8glvsO2hfaM=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Content-Type: Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To:From:Reply-To:Subject:Date:To:CC: Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:In-Reply-To:References: Content-Type:Content-Disposition; b=lmWI4XYYFyKDHk+qnren3O8TfE4jJSQBTJwyUhI6m3Bwh7Q0juWqISnwBRJRnnK/i f25lZoATGpbqqeEEDxZo1zEzgfvw6nwNy6/GFTBO4kmNrVVkpe6+DLl/XOv5uABpMl dJnvU2JFh0YcZf3r9rkmrPL+7REM44/wBS1gSXvvYeRzYDO/BIovP0j5GvfXDP8wL7 s14CP37VH7CTs+enFayiugAXUhewi/nJhGx/iFU13eJpH8HvInzd0k06ZdGzXr6NyL RT/fBiEDHzRRr6ktJpjXbAv8tw17yJTTglYJMtl8edeZvotMtS7eNjN/fU+HNaWXVa mdqZ0k2qafxDBKc+alhyLvKrJAiYWBVjpe9bD2W2QXufjx5mKlwLhQGKQ0RDfVpIak XRq5jrFey1VutPNS5NgdYg1ITDV/zH6AvgVXpg2jI8+UggHJQUsKCzQFF5dn4yDIoo Ymx72uZ99HtWOFrrMQlkLZ6jgy651kfgUCc/df4QU67u6fawrvX Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2019 01:39:18 +0000 From: "brian m. carlson" To: Vegard Nossum Cc: Junio C Hamano , git@vger.kernel.org, Paolo Bonzini Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 2/3] mailinfo: collect commit metadata from mail Message-ID: <20191029013917.4uow3iuvrzwfxges@camp.crustytoothpaste.net> Mail-Followup-To: "brian m. carlson" , Vegard Nossum , Junio C Hamano , git@vger.kernel.org, Paolo Bonzini References: <20191022114518.32055-1-vegard.nossum@oracle.com> <20191022114518.32055-3-vegard.nossum@oracle.com> <20191027184449.55pk5ga4cjxaxpej@camp.crustytoothpaste.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="rhrba2mlg5q7n2hl" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Machine: Running on camp using GNU/Linux on x86_64 (Linux kernel 5.2.0-3-amd64) User-Agent: NeoMutt/20180716 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org --rhrba2mlg5q7n2hl Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 2019-10-28 at 11:48:14, Vegard Nossum wrote: > Hi! >=20 > Thanks for the feedback. >=20 > I rebased on your branch and ran the tests without any problems. >=20 > t5100 is fine for me -- the file above is only used for testing the mail > splitting algorithm, so the choice of hashing algorithm should be > irrelevant for the test. That's also why I chose to use a personal key > for the signature, the other tests also use pregenerated emails to avoid > testing the email generation in those tests. (It could be useful to > include those "historical" test cases, which should still work in case > the format ever changes again in the future.) Okay, great. Thanks for checking, since it looked like we might use the commit data in the buffer, but if this is only for mail splitting, then I agree there's no problem. > The other tests generate the commits/emails within the test. Are you > sure you resolved the conflict in t4150 correctly (i.e. leaving out the > gitattributes test at the end)? I may have misresolved it, but I've just rebased on master and the two versions of t4150 (master and my branch) are now identical, so hopefully I haven't regressed anything in my new version. --=20 brian m. carlson: Houston, Texas, US OpenPGP: https://keybase.io/bk2204 --rhrba2mlg5q7n2hl Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.2.17 (GNU/Linux) iQIzBAEBCgAdFiEEX8OngXdrJt+H9ww3v1NdgR9S9osFAl23mEUACgkQv1NdgR9S 9ovKjg/+MMRhsCjBqQe21GPMmbEWUiZ1kWgV/MKLqBxekHV0oQxSR/sdg4mXLbgA y9Wrq4sWy7LvlFZ+i9tuHjhZu4iM86d79fUYxsfB9/4qsK9PtSGCLdgKj/A2wcGE +eIxMZonsN7DtInolprGJvY/YaHMtZE974Sh5Pj/mnyrnOM5DzSujO+yIz4Muyha Guj1gMjRCem4bsqRdCPevbJw15tjD44HNtawiToU2H+cgyyccsiYBGZtRuyGrewc OfUt2DUQFUOOGlhciFiiMSlcz4rWBlyXOuTkIgv3rQOh7vDONLY8RfQ3L89PbTlv keAXRfBJIcOBPXilNRp6uqUAFgtAMahaokdY/R5N8T46SmFGCkGB+hhfKJSBwDT6 BQE39f2ngNXBT/0x42g6IYx9oIKNub1z7oQTwVyu+SOM31Hf9vuY4xZHna1KdcEk AdY5k4H7mowcKxJ5ZGRjJG+EwR4ZDJ3BSJEVQJLeHW77Npz5CyJC6vYC/Se+LMkx aE/0wzTRepsoTbFArTMO07dPueWUTBBF7po2P1IBxratf45x7HHhh3QhUTUqTgDZ xxkIWvODeDi7cigDb+sIgNbRxDOhnxOzS1fmQQ01LLkukTKqq4DuJah1+kd8I8eZ iO8bUgA42T/u3W6bWZoEydeKmKGAWRttR7VLc/H6vATQyu2esys= =Zy0z -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --rhrba2mlg5q7n2hl--