Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2004 15:36:23 +0100 From: Ceri Davies <ceri@FreeBSD.org> To: freebsd-bugbusters <freebsd-bugbusters@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: per-user send-pr defaults: ~/.send-pr.rc? Message-ID: <20040429143623.GM10877@submonkey.net> In-Reply-To: <20040421093315.GC1051@isis.wad.cz> References: <20040414073119.GC1544@isis.wad.cz> <20040414103655.GN465@submonkey.net> <20040421093315.GC1051@isis.wad.cz>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--Re2uCLPLNzqOLVJA
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Wed, Apr 21, 2004 at 11:33:15AM +0200, Roman Neuhauser wrote:
> # ceri@FreeBSD.org / 2004-04-14 11:36:55 +0100:
> > On Wed, Apr 14, 2004 at 09:31:19AM +0200, Roman Neuhauser wrote:
> > > Would a patch for send-pr adding support for defaults handling using
> > > an rc file be welcome? If so, should I target send-pr as is in our tr=
ee,
> > > the one from the 4.0 tarball, or upstream cvs?
> >=20
> > I'd certainly be interested in looking at it. At the moment my plan to
> > upgrade is entirely {hub,www,freefall}.FreeBSD.org based - there seems
> > to be no pressing need to upgrade the distributed send-pr, so I'd target
> > the in-tree send-pr. If it should turn out that a client-side upgrade
> > is worth the effort then we can bring the patches forward (I had to do
> > the same for our local edit-pr hacks).
>=20
> I've used the attached patch to submit some PRs (65668 - 65680), and
> it was a relief.
> =20
> It's not commitable as-is (e. g. note -s/-S are swapped), I'd just
> like to know whether I'm on the right track.
Roman,
Apologies for the delay in responding - I meant to get to this much
sooner. I'm out of the country for a couple of weeks as of tomorrow so
any further replies will be delayed accordingly - I won't have any
email access while I'm there.
This looks really good so far to me. I'd recommend at first look that
the file be renamed .send-pr.conf (or just .send-pr), and perhaps an
option to ignore it would be useful too (I think most commands use -f
for that, which is already taken).
I'm slightly uncomfortable with allowing users to specify a default
priority and severity, but those fields are becoming useless anyway so
this may not be too much of an issue - I need to think about that a bit.
There's also a bit of churn in the variable names, but if this is
necessary for clarity (which looks the case) then it's a necessary evil.
Thanks again for working on this.
Ceri
--=20
--Re2uCLPLNzqOLVJA
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (FreeBSD)
iD8DBQFAkRLmocfcwTS3JF8RAjtYAJ4p2MKx3rxkbSjFiIHIThJXcOBxQgCfb0no
bEb3kW3GrlgZSZ0pdOebx+0=
=wuuO
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--Re2uCLPLNzqOLVJA--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040429143623.GM10877>