Re: [PATCH v4 1/6] t9001: non order-sensitive file comparison

On 06/08/2016 06:56 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
 > The earliest address patch@example.com and later addresses have
 > quite different meaning (the first one is meant to be the envelope
 > sender address, and does not name a recipient). While I think it is
 > a good idea to tell the test that the order of recipient addresses
 > given to the sendmail command (i.e. nobody, author, one and two)
 > does not matter by comparing sorted list of addresses, sorting the
 > whole argument list and comparing is making the test _too_ loose.
 > Don't you want to catch a potential bug that adds the envelope
 > sender address to the list of recipients by mistake, for example?

That could be an idea to make a more precise test. But I rather focus on our `--quote-email` option, I will put this one aside for now.