[PATCH RESEND] patchbomb: includes a unique series ID in email header

[Pierre-Yves David]

On 06/07/2014 06:45 AM, Augie Fackler wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 02, 2014 at 12:44:26PM -0700, pierre-yves.david at ens-lyon.org wrote:
>> # HG changeset patch
>> # User Pierre-Yves David <pierre-yves.david at fb.com>
>> # Date 1399355480 25200
>> #      Mon May 05 22:51:20 2014 -0700
>> # Node ID 7213e64762a006410625a3431f7c2250cfc6bd40
>> # Parent  25732fab4dc35a76cfb8f659fde48c7e0dc42dbf
>> patchbomb: includes a unique series ID in email header
>
> Queued, but I want to rework this in a followup. See below for a question.
>
>>
>> Now that we have patch index and series size information, having a unique series
>> identifier will helps tool to glue all email back together without any
>> additional logic.
>>
>> diff --git a/hgext/patchbomb.py b/hgext/patchbomb.py
>> --- a/hgext/patchbomb.py
>> +++ b/hgext/patchbomb.py
>> @@ -517,10 +517,11 @@ def patchbomb(ui, repo, *revs, **opts):
>>           if parent:
>>               m['In-Reply-To'] = parent
>>               m['References'] = parent
>>           if not parent or 'X-Mercurial-Node' not in m:
>>               parent = m['Message-Id']
>> +        m['X-Mercurial-Series-Id'] = parent
>
> Reading the code, I don't like your use of *parent* here - I'd MUCH
> rather this was the first patch in the series 100% of the time. As it
> stands, if I specify --in-reply-to the resulting series may end up
> being classified as some earlier series.
>
> (Practical example: I send three patches. Realize I screwed up, so I
> send a V2 with a --in-reply-to on my [1 of 3] patch - now the new
> series is the same Series-Id as the previous round.)
>
> Do you mind if I just push a followup to fix that corner case?

Please do!

-- 
Pierre-Yves David