From: Junio C Hamano Date: Thu, 26 May 2011 21:18:33 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] format-patch: preserve subject newlines with -k Message-ID: <7vboypw47q.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> In-Reply-To: <20110526205504.GC31340@sigill.intra.peff.net> Jeff King writes: > We have always treated multi-line subjects as second-class citizens, so > this is not a must-have patch. But I think it makes sense to do, > considering how simple it is, and the fact that it makes "format-patch > -k | am -k" always a no-op, even with multi-line subjects. I think this is a good thing to have, as the reason why we treated multi-line subjects as second-class citizens is exactly because we didn't try to stuff multiple lines on "Subject:" like you did with this patch. > diff --git a/builtin/log.c b/builtin/log.c > index d8c6c28..3fdf488 100644 > --- a/builtin/log.c > +++ b/builtin/log.c > @@ -768,7 +768,7 @@ static void make_cover_letter(struct rev_info *rev, int use_stdout, > pp_user_info(NULL, CMIT_FMT_EMAIL, &sb, committer, DATE_RFC2822, > encoding); > pp_title_line(CMIT_FMT_EMAIL, &msg, &sb, subject_start, extra_headers, > - encoding, need_8bit_cte); > + encoding, need_8bit_cte, 0); I do not appreciate a single-bit tweak as separate parameter to a function. Back when pp_title_line() had only "do we need 8-bit cte", it was Ok, but now that you are adding another bit, could we make it an "unsigned flag"?