opto / Expression-Search-NG

update of Thunderbird addon ExpressionSearch/Gmail UI for TB 78 and later
61 stars 8 forks source link

Replace with source and git commit history #51

Closed riedel closed 2 years ago

riedel commented 2 years ago

This pull request is just PoC. Correctly opto/Expression-Search-NG should be recreated as a fork of wangvisual.

I can easily recreate a PR with just the relevant commit history.

riedel commented 2 years ago

If you want to use this: instead of merging this, actually I would strongly recomment:

  1. Checkout this PR or better https://github.com/riedel/expression-search/tree/expression-search-NG with your changes
  2. Fork from the original wangvisual
  3. Add new fork as remote
  4. Reapply the commits after 3d15156 using rebase -i on top of fork (delete any other "pick" lines in the prompt)
  5. push back to new fork

(hope this works: should probably also remove me as committer)

opto commented 2 years ago

I actually started it as a fork, then others contributed without forking, so now it is a mess. Head is in a repo which lost track to wang, while my repo tracks the original until ca. June 2022. I would like to get that together, also for my reference, but my look at git a few weeks ago did not easily tell how to bring that together, without creating millions of conflicts that need to be resolved.

opto commented 2 years ago

filename search is working only sometimes, so I am just looking at that instead of cleaning up ... It is actually trying to de-mime the message parts, maybe something goes wrong there with modern messages. Also am adding a kind of query builder for those who easily forget the tonocc's and other abbreviations.

opto commented 2 years ago

If I want to review this, then I need to pull from your repo? Or can I get PR's into my repo before accepting?

riedel commented 2 years ago

You could just merge the PR (it should be just the same as the XPI, except I recreated the LICENSE). The problem is that because how github/git works this is a bit of a mess: I rebased this on top of your repo (with the xpi in it).

The problem is I guess that the issues will be all in the wrong place. (github unfortunately is really bad at fixing those things: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/9644046/how-to-change-the-source-of-a-github-fork)

It would be a bit cleaner IMHO not to use the pull request feature. What you could eg. do locally is just do (hope I got this right):

git remote add riedel https://github.com/riedel/expression-search.git
git fetch riedel
git checkout riedel/expression-search-NG
git checkout -b main
git push origin main

(assuming your repo is origin) This does not change the master, so you do not have to worry too much.

Alternatively you can do

git remote add riedel https://github.com/riedel/expression-search.git
git fetch riedel
git remote add wangvisual https://github.com/wangvisual/expression-search
git fetch wangvisual
git checkout wangvisual/master
git checkout -b main
git push origin main
git checkout riedel/expression-search-NG
git checkout -b latest

and then do a rebase with

git rebase -i main

with the rebase you can do things step by step theoretically by exchanging "pick" with "edit" and use

git commit --amend
git rebase --continue

in each step

riedel commented 2 years ago

As I said I also only checkout out the originals and unpacked the xpis on top and used "--date=" in the commits to get it timed. Used the commit messages from the releases and set you as "--author". e.g.

  840  rm -rf * && unzip ~/Downloads/expression-search-NG3.4.4.xpi
  841  find . -type f -and -not -path "./.git/*" -print0 |     xargs -r -0 ls -1 -t --full-time |     head -20
  842  git add . && git commit --author="Klaus Buecher <buecher@optosolar.com>" --date="2022-09-10 21:07:46"  -a
opto commented 2 years ago

thanks, I will have a look at it. Licence should be MPL. The original files were GPL or MPL, so John set it to MPL. I see an advantage, this will be easier to combine with other nice stuff (calendar search and some other ideas) - which cannot be done if that code would be force-relicensed to GPL just by including it.

riedel commented 2 years ago

Hi, due, to the unclear licensing I took precaution and deleted my branches to not create any damages to existing IPR: I saw that some code by you was even CC-BY-ND-4.0 (I can quickly recreate everything on demand as soon as a workable license is really put on top of everything)