Re: [PATCH 0/2] format-patch handling in-body From headers

From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Date: Jul 3, 2013, 09:03 UTC
Message-ID: <20130703090352.GA20749@sigill.intra.peff.net>
In-Reply-To: <7vd2r0ggup.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>

On Wed, Jul 03, 2013 at 01:58:22AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:

Show 13 quoted lines

> Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:
> 
> > However, doing it right is kind of tricky due to rfc822 quoting, rfc2047
> > encoding, and handling non-ascii names correctly. Instead, this patch
> > series takes a different approach: it teaches format-patch to do the
> > transformation itself, so that it can be used by my script along with
> > any other non-send-email workflows that exist (e.g., git-imap-send
> > suffers from the same problem).
> 
> I think the original expectation when format-patch was done was to
> use Sender: to identify you while keeping the author on From:, but
> with the current world order to use in-body header, this addition
> makes sense.

Yeah, I think using "Sender" would simply be too confusing, as most MUAs show only the "From", and authors of patches do not necessarily know or care about the mailing of their patch.

> I wonder if we can lose some code from send-email then?

Potentially, as long as we default to "--from" to turn this feature on all the time (otherwise we are breaking the existing "format-patch && send-email" workflow).

It may also confuse people who mark up the patches on disk before running send-email. I don't know if people actually change the From header there or not.

-Peff