Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2004 21:21:31 +0200 From: Roman Neuhauser <neuhauser@chello.cz> To: freebsd-bugbusters <freebsd-bugbusters@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: per-user send-pr defaults: ~/.send-pr.rc? Message-ID: <20040429192130.GA429@isis.wad.cz> In-Reply-To: <20040429143623.GM10877@submonkey.net> References: <20040414073119.GC1544@isis.wad.cz> <20040414103655.GN465@submonkey.net> <20040421093315.GC1051@isis.wad.cz> <20040429143623.GM10877@submonkey.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
# ceri@FreeBSD.org / 2004-04-29 15:36:23 +0100:
> 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 tree,
> > > > the one from the 4.0 tarball, or upstream cvs?
> > >
> > > 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).
> >
> > I've used the attached patch to submit some PRs (65668 - 65680), and
> > it was a relief.
> >
> > 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.
> 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),
Yeah, the file name was intended to have the leading dot.
> and perhaps an option to ignore it would be useful too (I think most
> commands use -f for that, which is already taken).
I'll look into this. There's a few things I'd like to change about
option handling, but fear breaking BC. One alternative I've been
thinking about is putting minimum (or no) changes in send-pr, and
writing another client, perhaps in awk. Is there any chance of
getting that commited if it provided considerably more functionality
than send-pr?
> 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.
Current send-pr allows the user to change them anyway (I wanted as
much compatibility as possible), they just cannot have it preset. In
my case that means I have to set the same (lowest) values by hand in
every pr.
> 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.
I had a simpler scheme in the beginning, but send-pr refused to send
out the PR because it stayed the same across an edit.
> Thanks again for working on this.
NP, I'm doing that for my own sanity.
--
If you cc me or remove the list(s) completely I'll most likely ignore
your message. see http://www.eyrie.org./~eagle/faqs/questions.html
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040429192130.GA429>