From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.7 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8533BC43616 for ; Wed, 12 May 2021 17:55:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 62CB061434 for ; Wed, 12 May 2021 17:55:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S236849AbhELRnT (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 May 2021 13:43:19 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:44126 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1347186AbhELRW7 (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 May 2021 13:22:59 -0400 Received: from mail-oi1-x234.google.com (mail-oi1-x234.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::234]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 115F5C061574 for ; Wed, 12 May 2021 10:21:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-oi1-x234.google.com with SMTP id u16so22938323oiu.7 for ; Wed, 12 May 2021 10:21:51 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=date:from:to:cc:message-id:in-reply-to:references:subject :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Hl5tBYuVBzOZp28AJNuQ/n/nLEgbcJpCp0Cbcb4MrHE=; b=helITNMkeo6AhDsA+/Ig839WMdtm0mlgkxumttMWma0eQfiuplphg4E5MwZ2qKtoYF 4ol3xlVxshUQQOzNfQXYRZ4/rG+MFgiCLm6D7DN307lG/0Lu4ATjXHZNJxjVO+AnZSkz 6UVxwOCRtPacLiNvd8Ba/ZCB548ROKysdRsWcLAoOpaPU9Cay5E7ZE/zrUqEgn8CTuls X28IBowZPiNoF+pxfSPXDJSGtsDNGhMGWTZ+cIYF0UH/K6tA3RzAV888/M0ohqPAQDmj GpX3UGElUgLXHNChjS8deKK30Ub1pJ7NBp0nJY73H97jTo7HDbjgNauihxO/4tkFqGAW xBxg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:message-id:in-reply-to :references:subject:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Hl5tBYuVBzOZp28AJNuQ/n/nLEgbcJpCp0Cbcb4MrHE=; b=H2gC5lO/CAbXXcfGo3aoEf7u8mbY2X/rgHvSTUvpELNWgn9W1RwA+U2X/mTM8tPHXa N5sjMt313H/t3EDPNGmg8zuX+Gjaf3jBUqn6xK7iYFvw6wyf/16UPMhNmZLMrn6un/dN MYiT6V4+j/LTDUiCeLRVo73mF2Mf2owQ/fRtnWvhvbxTt26B8z7TvDGvQxQRxziPLHf3 Uz6AfHvKfg9FTOm148MBVmMMyxysMsVGzS7GcqIoT1F6eZd8XFOxigOUKp1Oc8S8FFGW YewHT0ZCZM5XUz9XZ4XA0MUL5lwK8vJorSwVLWe85I5GzJSSZUfff+6MByRA6Z7OeIRJ 7X+Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5337g1dXofnpLVgJCDMl81+syflFiGlDAxdewUcQws6Wepw7bsyV /45QNTa8EJjslMjLcn8hTf00zJ3AeJ4kVQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxg4nxGxW04eK/dAcukH8s3nlNhPdvEpKk7OCyP/YOEJP+IeJMAHJGjs8IIaQZGJE7ku8nZ6Q== X-Received: by 2002:aca:42c6:: with SMTP id p189mr8283307oia.36.1620840110366; Wed, 12 May 2021 10:21:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([2806:2f0:4060:638f:a2c5:89ff:fe0c:1151]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id w66sm129968ooa.37.2021.05.12.10.21.49 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 12 May 2021 10:21:49 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 12 May 2021 12:21:48 -0500 From: Felipe Contreras To: Gregory Anders , Felipe Contreras Cc: git@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <609c0eaca8d28_71bd120878@natae.notmuch> In-Reply-To: References: <20210512033039.4022-1-greg@gpanders.com> <609b8a5a65826_6e0fc2084c@natae.notmuch> Subject: Re: [PATCH] git-send-email: add sendmailCommand option Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Gregory Anders wrote: > >> +--sendmail-cmd=:: > > > >Oh no no no. Don't do shortcuts. > > > >If you think --sendmail-command is too long, then address that problem > >head on, don't try to hide it. > > > >I do think it's too long, which is why I suggested --command (especially > >since it's obvious which command we are talking about), but I wouldn't > >suggest --sdm-command, or something of that sort. We have to own our > >decisions. > > > > 1. --command > > 2. --sendmail > > 3. --sendmail-command > > > >We have to pick one. I suggest #1. > > > >To try to make #3 shorter is just shoving the problem under the rug. > > The intention behind `--sendmail-cmd` was consistency with `--to-cmd` > and `--cc-cmd`. Though both of those options also use the condensed > 'cmd' form in their configuration options as well, so I suppose I should > also change this one to 'sendemail.sendmailcmd'. I see. In that case that might make sense. I still prefer #1. > >> --- a/t/t9001-send-email.sh > >> +++ b/t/t9001-send-email.sh > >> @@ -57,7 +57,7 @@ test_no_confirm () { > >> git send-email \ > >> --from="Example " \ > >> --to=nobody@example.com \ > >> - --smtp-server="$(pwd)/fake.sendmail" \ > >> + --sendmail-cmd="\"$(pwd)/fake.sendmail\"" \ > > > >People are already using --smpt-server=$cmd, we need to keep testing > >that. > > > >Yes, eventually we would want them to move to --sendmail-cmd (or > >--command, or whatever), but that won't happen tomorrow. Therefore our > >primary tests need to be focused on --smtp-server. > > > >We need new *additional* tests for --sendmail-cmd, but those should not > >override the current tests. At least not right now. > > I will add a test case for the absolute path form of --smtp-server; > however, if we are introducing an option for specifying a sendmail-like > command, surely that is the one to use when using "fake.sendmail", no? > > If we leave the test cases as-is for now, we introduce a split that > someone will eventually need to come back and update anyway. Instead of > kicking that can down the road, I thought it best to go ahead and do it > now. The sole purpose of software is that it's useful to users. Software that works today but not tomorrow is bad software. The primary purpose of the testing framework is to ensure that doesn't happen; that git keeps working in the same way today than it did yesterday. That's why it's more important that tests excercise the options people were using yesterday. In addition we also want to be testing new functionality, but that's *in addition*. Maybe at some point in the future more people will be using --sendmail-cmd, but right now that's not the case. Right now we need to be testing the option people are using *today*. Cheers. -- Felipe Contreras