"submit" command naming - just "bundle" preferred?

[Aaron Bentley]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

John Arbash Meinel wrote:
> Aaron Bentley wrote:
>> But does the world really need another mail client?  Especially when
>> mutt behaves like that already?
> 
> mutt does, but Mail.app, Thunderbird, Outlook, Evolution.... there are lots of
> mail programs out there that people prefer to mutt. (I don't know whether pine
> does/doesn't, but it seems like it could). And consider using 'gmail' :)

Right.  And I figure people who don't prefer mutt won't like it if
Bazaar gives them a mutt-like interface instead of using their mail client.

>>> Now, for spawning the user's prefered MUA to send the message, I propose
>>> to use xdg-email program [1] from the FreeDesktop.org project.
>> It doesn't seem to be installed on my Etch.  Is it very popular?
> 
> It sounds like it would be useful if it was available.

Agreed.  It would be a good starting point for mailer support.

>> That's not really what I was asking.  Given that we'll use our normal
>> configuration mechanism, what values will we use?  How's the policy
>> supposed to work?
> 
> Sure, this is something that:
> http://bazaar-vcs.org/SubmitByMail
> 
> was meant to address.

> I think what we discussed (all the way back in Montreal), was that we would
> have 2 values. One for the email address that *I* will send to when using this
> branch, and one that other people who branch from me should use. Though it
> would probably be sufficient in a first pass to have a single value that just
> propagated by 'bzr branch'.

Maybe it's a YAGNI at this point, but I'd kinda like this command to
work both for mailing list submission and for PQM submission.

bzr send --review <--- send a merge request to the ML via my mail client
bzr send --apply <--- send a merge request to PQM a la pqm-submit

And I'm caught between overgeneralizing, and overspecializing.

Don't want too get too specific to us.

>> Will the mail attachments have sensible names?  Can I configure Bazaar
>> to stick them in a particular directory instead of a temp one?
> 
> I would think we should create temporary ones, send them, and then delete them
> once they are sent. So it seems to make more sense to always put them in temp.

Well, then, we have a problem of knowing when it's safe to delete the
patch.  With GUI clients, it's hard to know when the mail's been sent.

> We could certainly come up with a way to name them (branch-nick + revno +
> $RANDOM + .patch).

Actually, the branch-nick + revno would be unique enough.  It's only
going to affect those who download/save the patch.

Aaron
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFGn8290F+nu1YWqI0RAnEcAJ9XSdsEMJPJSGIySJsnijpQR0/NIwCePgsM
y7O9AvuHKclm7oWCyhwAezw=
=vKHE
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----