Re: [PATCH] generate a valid rfc2047 mail header for multi-line subject.
- From
- xzer <xiaozhu@gmail.com>
- Date
- Feb 23, 2011, 15:34 UTC
- Message-ID
- <AANLkTinf6P-erY-9p5WPWbK+uAf1hozvAutV0zPSpHGQ@mail.gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <7vsjvfby0z.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
2011/2/23 Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>:
Show 14 quoted lines
> xzer <xiaozhu@gmail.com> writes: > >> Subject: Re: [PATCH] generate a valid rfc2047 mail header for multi-line subject. > > We prefer to have "[PATCH] subsystem: description without final full-stop" here. > >> There is still a problem that git-am will lost the line break. > > What does "still" refer to? It is unclear under what condition the > command lose "the line break" (nor which line break you are refering to; I > am guessing that you have a commit that begins with a multi-line paragraph > and you are talking about line breaks between the lines in the first > paragraph). >
Yes, that is what I am refering, the line breaks in the first paragraph.
Show 8 quoted lines
>> It's not easy to retain it, but as the first step, we can generate
>> a valid rfc2047 header now.
>
> Please describe what is broken (iow, "Given this sample input, we
> currently generate this output, which is not a valid rfc2047") and what
> the new output looks like ("Update pp_title_line() to generate this output
> instead.")
>At present we can only concatenate the lines in the first paragraph so that we can generate a valid rfc2047 mail, but we will lost the line breaks after import the patch by git-am.
>> --- > > Missing sign-off with a real name. >
I am sorry that I didn't find the document of submitting a patch until yesterday, Thanks for your comment.
Show 28 quoted lines
>> diff --git a/pretty.c b/pretty.c
>> index 8549934..f18a38d 100644
>> --- a/pretty.c
>> +++ b/pretty.c
>> @@ -249,6 +249,33 @@ needquote:
>> strbuf_addstr(sb, "?=");
>> }
>>
>> +static void add_rfc2047_multiline(struct strbuf *sb, const char *line, int len,
>> + const char *encoding)
>> +{
>> + int first = 1;
>> + char *mline = xmemdupz(line, len);
>> + const char *cline = mline;
>> + int offset = 0, linelen = 0;
>> + for (;;) {
>
> You seem to have indent that uses SPs instead of HT around here...
>
>> + linelen = get_one_line(cline);
>
> I can see you are trying to be careful not to let get_one_line() overstep
> past "len" the caller gave you by making a copy first, but is this
> overhead really necessary? After all we know in this static function that
> the caller is feeding the contents from a strbuf, which always have a
> terminating NUL (and that is why it is Ok that get_one_line() is not a
> counted string interface).
>I am not sure that who will call this function in future, I think since there is a argument as len, so I'd better to obey the function declare.
Show 39 quoted lines
>> + >> + cline += linelen; >> + >> + if (!linelen) >> + break; >> + >> + if (!first) >> + strbuf_addf(sb, "\n "); >> + >> + offset = *(cline -1) == '\n'; >> + >> + add_rfc2047(sb, cline-linelen, linelen-offset, encoding); >> + first = 0; >> + >> + } >> + free(mline); >> +} > > So the general idea of this change (I am thinking aloud what should be in > the updated commit log message as the problem description) is that: > > - We currently give an entire multi-line paragraph string to the > add_rfc2047() function to be formatted as the title of the commit; > > - The add_rfc2047() functionjust passes "\n" through, without making it a > folding whitespace followed by a newline, to help callers that want to > use this function to produce a header line that is rfc 2822 conformant; > > - The patch introduces a new function add_rfc2047_multiline() that splits > its input and performs line folding for such a caller (namely, the > pp_title_line() function); > > - Another caller of add_rfc2047(), pp_user_info, is not changed, and it > won't fold the name of the user that appear on the From: line. > > It is unclear if the last point is really the right thing to do, though. > It is not a new problem that an author name that has a "\n" in it would > break the output, but we probably would want to fix that case too here? >
Your comment is just right for what I tried to do, I explained why I add a new function for subject specially in the mail which replied to Jeff, I want to remain the line breaks after import the patch, so I think I need do something here in future, it will be compatible with rfc2047 and also can be imported with line breaks correctly. I don't know how yet, so I just want to left a possibility. So I introduce a new function for subject only.
xzer