Re: [elpa] scratch/email-revision-details

[Phil Sainty <psainty@orcon.net.nz>]

On 2021-08-07 03:30, Stefan Monnier wrote:
> Feel free to push this to `master`, it looks good to me.

Done.  (Well, pushed to elpa-admin.)

For the other commit (just re-pushed to my scratch branch, but
the code is unchanged), I'm not sure how to test it, aside from
testing in isolation the part which actually gets the revision
details from git for a given `release-rev' value (which I've
tested against so-long.el).

I've gone with the full compliment of author+commit timestamps
in both relative and absolute formats, which looks like this:

; * lisp/so-long.el: Bump version for the GNU ELPA build
Authored 3 days ago on Wed, 4 Aug 2021 17:17:23 +1200
Committed 3 days ago on Wed, 4 Aug 2021 17:17:23 +1200
Revision b84986af52d4e9debace2850a5ec106f51e38e61

I think they are all useful for this purpose.

The relative times are helpful because they're such an obvious
indication if the value is significantly different to what
you'd expected.

The absolute times are still useful because this is arriving
by email, and so you're never reading it at the time it was
generated.

The author time is helpful because it doesn't change when
the code is rebased; so if the commit in question was written
much earlier than the expected commit, you again get that
immediate information that something is wrong.

And the commit time is still useful alongside the author time,
as it will match the time you actually modified the that commit,
so you can mentally match those together too.


If the code looks sane to you, are you able to test it, or
let me know how to safely do that?  I see the commented debug
line ahead of the (message-send) call, but I don't know whether
that's the only code that I'd need to be concerned about.


cheers,
-Phil