{"thread":{"id":"30549","subject":"Are author names ending with a dot invalid?","startedAt":"2012-05-18T00:14:57Z","lastAt":"2012-05-19T00:23:35Z","messageCount":2,"participants":["Felipe Contreras","Jeff King"],"isPatch":false,"patchVersion":null,"patchTotal":null},"messages":[{"id":"191640","messageId":"CAMP44s2OoxUVFE57e8C2Km7rcGn88KkLXxdaA3s5RE6nZ7TU=A@mail.gmail.com","threadId":"30549","inReplyTo":null,"subject":"Are author names ending with a dot invalid?","fromName":"Felipe Contreras","fromEmail":"felipe.contreras@gmail.com","sentAt":"2012-05-18T00:14:57Z","receivedAt":"2012-05-18T00:14:57Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"felipe.contreras@gmail.com","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/8358?v=4"},"body":"Hi,\n\nIt looks like authors ending with a dot ('Foo Jr. <foo@bar.com>') are\nconverted without a dot ('Foo Jr <foo@bar.com>') is that intentional?\n\nCheers.\n\n-- \nFelipe Contreras\n"},{"id":"191705","messageId":"20120519002335.GD765@sigill.intra.peff.net","threadId":"30549","inReplyTo":"CAMP44s2OoxUVFE57e8C2Km7rcGn88KkLXxdaA3s5RE6nZ7TU=A@mail.gmail.com","subject":"Re: Are author names ending with a dot invalid?","fromName":"Jeff King","fromEmail":"peff@peff.net","sentAt":"2012-05-19T00:23:35Z","receivedAt":"2012-05-19T00:23:35Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"peff@peff.net","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/45925?v=4"},"body":"On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 02:14:57AM +0200, Felipe Contreras wrote:\n\n> It looks like authors ending with a dot ('Foo Jr. <foo@bar.com>') are\n> converted without a dot ('Foo Jr <foo@bar.com>') is that intentional?\n\nI was just digging in this code today, and I noticed the same thing. The\nculprit is ident.c:copy, which strips magic characters from the\nbeginning, end, and middle. Except that the set of magic characters is\ndifferent at the edges (see ident.c:crud), and in the middle (\"<\", \">\",\n\"\\n\").\n\nThis dates all the way back to 6aa33f4 (Abstract out the \"name <email>\ndate\" handling of commit-tree.c, 2005-07-12), which in turn was adapting\ncode from earlier (though it also has the issue).\n\nSo I think it's intentional, but I also think it's wrong, and it's\nsimply that nobody has complained about it, because it's not that\ncommon.\n\n-Peff\n"}]}