Re: [PATCH/POLL] git-format-patch: the default suffix is now .patch, not .txt

From: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Date: Jan 18, 2007, 08:43 UTC
Message-ID: <7v64b4ohcj.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>
In-Reply-To: <81b0412b0701172359y1ef4f936pcdcb2de53d6bd468@mail.gmail.com>

"Alex Riesen" <raa.lkml@gmail.com> writes:

> I'd like to see ".patch" there, but...
>
> I have to mention, though, that the majority of the editing
> programs is used on that stupid thing called windows ...

Even if majority of git target audience were on Windows, I thought majority of Windows users are on either VFAT or NTFS and not DOS 8.3 filesystems these days.

> Also, how many mail clients know that .patch is actually
> a text and not application/binary? It'll make patch
> reviewing harder for some (not sure if I'd like a review
> of such a person, though).

Is it common for popular MUAs to have a single command that lets you specify a file and depending on its suffix paste it inline or make it an attachment? I had an impression that most have separate commands for "read text from file (as opposed to typing)" and "attach a file (of random type, not necessarily and more often than not text)".

The output of format-patch is not meant to be used as an attachment (it is "read text from file" kind), so I do not think your worry applies here. Maybe something I am missing?