Re: [WIP-PATCH 0/2] send-email: refactor the email parser loop
- From
- Samuel GROOT <samuel.groot@grenoble-inp.org>
- Date
- May 30, 2016, 14:01 UTC
- Message-ID
- <0abbc11b-5741-ee2e-292c-245c2b974f8e@grenoble-inp.org>
- In-Reply-To
- <vpq8tyshh8f.fsf@anie.imag.fr>
On 05/29/2016 08:05 PM, Matthieu Moy wrote:
Show 28 quoted lines
> Samuel GROOT <samuel.groot@grenoble-inp.org> writes: > >> Should we take what Eric suggested (see below) as standard output? >> >>> Since the headers are already shown after those lines, it's >>> redundant to have the entire line. And we could add >>> trailers after the headers (with a blank line to delimit): >>> >>> # existing header output: >>> From: F <F@example.com> >>> Cc: A <author@example.com>, One <one@example.com> >>> Subject: foo >>> >>> # new trailer output >>> Signed-off-by: SoB <SoB@example.com> >>> Acked-by: ack <ack@example.com> > > I don't think adding the trailers in the output is needed. If the > message says > > Adding foo@example from Signed-off-by trailer > > I can guess that it's from "Signed-off-by: foo@example" without having > it explicitly. > > Perhaps others think differently, but for me, the shortest output would > be the better (if only to solve the "I never see these lines, they > scrolled out of my terminal" issue).
I agree, the shorter the better.
> Ideally, I'd even like to shorten the current output a bit more (the > X-Mailer: header is useless IMHO, and the Date: and Message-id: headers > are probably not useful enough to be shown by default).
Agreed.
Show 11 quoted lines
> (Just thinking aloud, obviously none of this should be a prerequisite to > accept your refactoring patch) > >> And keep "(mbox) Adding ..." lines as error output, or maybe >> displayable by a new option `--verbose`? > > I think the "Adding ..." lines make sense by default at least for > beginners (just a few days ago, I received a bunch of test emails by > your team follow by a "Oops, I just noticed you got Cc-ed in my tests" > message ;-), that would probably have been worse without the message). > There could be an advice.* option to deactivate them, though.
An advice.* option seems a good solution to me.
> The (mbox) prefix doesn't seem useful to me OTOH, I think it's a > leftover debugging message.
(mbox) prefix was introduced by Ryan Anderson in 2005 (can't find the exact commit though), in opposition with the (non-mbox) format ("lots of email") that was used before.
Is the "lots of email" format still used?
When adding Cc: from a Signed-off-by: field, (body) prefix is used.