From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <e@80x24.org>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-ASN:  
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.0 required=3.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL,BAYES_00,
	DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,
	T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
	version=3.4.2
Received: from localhost (dcvr.yhbt.net [127.0.0.1])
	by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 959C11F4D7;
	Thu, 12 May 2022 19:38:59 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=80x24.org;
	s=selector1; t=1652384339;
	bh=UPaWmLCXuXpWp03bnj9QoHnsjbK4b/MuKolaN2wJnJQ=;
	h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From;
	b=1pfMg3FzFwZhHfJUH/hPk4V2B07Scc8S0xFUDrQVWsBrj3axAckc8NsiwfjMC25tz
	 vrmILKd5nZ+7SoBtbklYijdmoCG1FC554BFfbn949xOOm1VOmD/Mle46cZnzwDd0CZ
	 lYd2TVsOCVdIK3h8TsbHdtdOb561CSQKhT4ko9w8=
Date: Thu, 12 May 2022 19:38:59 +0000
From: Eric Wong <e@80x24.org>
To: Konstantin Ryabitsev <konstantin@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc: meta@public-inbox.org
Subject: Re: RFC: hooks in public-inbox-watch
Message-ID: <20220512193859.M526956@dcvr>
References: <20220512180442.ais2ujjolq53vkio@meerkat.local>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20220512180442.ais2ujjolq53vkio@meerkat.local>
List-Id: <meta.public-inbox.org>

Konstantin Ryabitsev <konstantin@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> Hi, all:
> 
> What do you think about a mechanism to run hooks at the stage right before
> public-inbox-watch adds a new message to the archive? One feature that would
> be neat is to search archives for all instances of the same patch using its
> $(git-patch-id --stable) and adding a header, e.g.:
> 
>     X-Git-Patch-ID: 19c05284cea20b72b44c2b7e6cfd782a6a860cf1 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000

There shouldn't be any need for a header.  I've been meaning to
teach -index to use git-patch-id and index it's output, anyways.
That would work for old messages, too.

> I know this can be done at the postfix stage, but seems like it would be more
> efficient at the ingestion stage.
> 
> Maybe even instead of a hook this could be a native public-inbox feature, with
> this header being indexed by default?

I've always tried as hard as possible to avoid adding new
headers or extra data; especially when we have a common and
stable tool to generate it.  Another danger is a malicious
client could also be introducing wrong ones to confuse searches.

Thanks.