From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Philip Oakley" Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] doc: give examples for send-email cc-cmd operation Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2015 23:48:48 +0100 Organization: OPDS Message-ID: <11647308F0684851A72DDF51A486D11D@PhilipOakley> References: <1437416790-5792-1-git-send-email-philipoakley@iee.org><1437416790-5792-5-git-send-email-philipoakley@iee.org><996C8C8A69844E44890D09811C57DAC8@PhilipOakley> Reply-To: "Philip Oakley" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "Git List" , "Eric Sunshine" To: "Junio C Hamano" X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Jul 22 00:48:06 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1ZHgKU-0001sd-4z for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Wed, 22 Jul 2015 00:48:06 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933095AbbGUWsA (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Jul 2015 18:48:00 -0400 Received: from out1.ip01ir2.opaltelecom.net ([62.24.128.237]:14613 "EHLO out1.ip01ir2.opaltelecom.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755925AbbGUWsA (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Jul 2015 18:48:00 -0400 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A2D7CQDBy65VPAO4BlxcGYJ8VGmGUW22T4V/BAQCgUZNAQEBAQEBBwEBAQFBJBuEHgUBAQEBAgEIAQEuHgEBIQUGAgMFAgEDFQwlFAEEGgYHAxQGEwgCAQIDAQqICwy8VZAIi0yEIxEBUYMegRQFjDg4h2MBgQ2DZ4h4RpMkg2GBCWYBC4IoPTGBDYE+AQEB X-IPAS-Result: A2D7CQDBy65VPAO4BlxcGYJ8VGmGUW22T4V/BAQCgUZNAQEBAQEBBwEBAQFBJBuEHgUBAQEBAgEIAQEuHgEBIQUGAgMFAgEDFQwlFAEEGgYHAxQGEwgCAQIDAQqICwy8VZAIi0yEIxEBUYMegRQFjDg4h2MBgQ2DZ4h4RpMkg2GBCWYBC4IoPTGBDYE+AQEB X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.15,519,1432594800"; d="scan'208";a="794517723" Received: from host-92-6-184-3.as43234.net (HELO PhilipOakley) ([92.6.184.3]) by out1.ip01ir2.opaltelecom.net with ESMTP; 21 Jul 2015 23:47:56 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6157 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: From: "Junio C Hamano" > Junio C Hamano writes: > >>> I was trying to use, essentially, 'cat list.txt' as the command,... > > One thing that needs to be made clear is that I do not think we want > to encourage `cat list.txt #` abuse in the first place. OK [1] > It is an > unacceptable hack for us to encourage in the longer term. It may > happen to work with the current implementation, but it does so > merely by depending on the implementation too much. > > If it is so common to want to spray all your patches to exactly the > same list of recipients that is unconditionally determined, having It wasn't 'unconditional spraying' ;-), rather I'd carefully select who to send to for each series, previously with multiple cc=".." on the command line. > multiple sendemail.cc configuration variables, which are cumulative, > is already one way to do so, and you do not have to type such a long > option "--cc-cmd='cat $filename'" every time. > > And if you do not want configuration for some reason, and having a > list of addresses in a flat file is so common, we could have a new > option "--cc-list=$filename" to support that use case. I however > doubt anything that starts with "First you make a list of addresses > in a flat file, and then do this" is a good solution. For a longer series, a list will still need collating by the OP somehow, but I don't think that alone would justify a new option. > > I would think that it would probably be the best way to address "I > often want to cc these recipients, but not always" is to keep a list > of aliases, each entry of which expands to the recipients, and say > "--cc=group" from the command line to have it expanded to the set of > recipients. > [1] You mentioned in the previous email the script command argv[] array, which I hadn't heard of (for a script), having been used the $1, $2, method. Given that new understanding, IIUC the proposal is that the garantee is the "--cc-cmd" should be a single command/script name, with the patchfilename passed as $1, and that a 'string string' for interpretation would now be deprecated. I'll see about a shorter doc patch that restricts itself to just the base aspects, if that would be acceptable? -- Philip