From: Jeremy White <jwhite@codeweavers.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2009 13:50:38 GMT
Subject: Re: [Virtual PATCH] Add an option to wrap a patch in <pre> in git-imap-send which ironically results in a cleaner patch from Thunderbird.
Message-ID: <49957AAE.7070505@codeweavers.com>
In-Reply-To: <49955860.80504@drmicha.warpmail.net>

Michael J Gruber wrote:
> Junio C Hamano venit, vidit, dixit 13.02.2009 05:19:
>> I do not think of a reason, other than to trigger the workaround you
>> mentioned in the documentation part of the patch, why any sane user would
>> want to send a patch as HTML.  This configuration variable sounds more
>> like "imap.forceThunderbirdToSendNonFlowedTextByExploitingItsBug" than
>> "imap.html", in other words.

With Michael's proviso well in hand (it's a feature, not a bug), I
did want to say that I otherwise think this is a reasonable analysis.

In fact, calling the option imap.thunderbird-fixed-html is arguably a
better name.

Finally, I know it's my patch, but for the record, I won't be hurt if
it's round filed.  You can make a clean case that not taking
it in leaves pressure on the joint dev communities to find a better 
solution.

But the only better approach I can imagine is if Thunderbird were
to respect a 'format=fixed' injected in a message body.  However,
as I think about that, I believe a correct Thunderbird implementation
of that would require having a per message setting for format.
The Thunderbird team is very reluctant to expose any UI on
f=f (see https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=86607),
so having a per message UI element certainly sounds like a dead
idea walking :-/.

Cheers,

Jeremy