Re: Fw: [PATCH 31/49] PCI: PCI/Cardbus cards hidden, needs pci=assign-busses to fix

From: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Date: Mar 24, 2006, 01:26 UTC
Message-ID: <7vbqvw3a62.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>
In-Reply-To: <20060324004654.GA19763@kroah.com>

Greg KH <greg@kroah.com> writes:

Show 7 quoted lines

> I'm using:
> 	git format-patch -n origin..HEAD
> to generate the raw patch files, and then:
> 	git-send-email --in-reply-to "<some_message_id>" --to some_mailing_list@somewhere.com
>
> fixing the obvious message id and mailing list address to be the correct
> one depending on the subsystem the patches are from.

I think format-patch does the right thing (I wrote it), but I am not sure what send-email does wrt the From: header. Who wrote the send-email anyway? I see your name on it ;-)

The cleanest way send-email should handle a patch authored by somebody other than you, I think, is to still use From: to name the author (format-patch output records the author on From: line), and use Sender: of the outgoing e-mail to record that the message is from you. I suspect it probably doesn't.

The second best would be to add the duplicated From: to name the author (who is _not_ you) to the top of the body of the message. I do not particularly like that format myself, though. Sender: header was invented to send an e-mail authored by somebody other than the sender of the message at the mail transport level, long before Documentation/SubmittingPatches were written and git was invented, and somehow I think that is a more kosher way to handle that than the "extra From: at the beginning of the message" clutch recommended in SubmittingPatches document.

On the acceptance side, "git am" (or "git applymbox") should be able to handle either format.