From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tom Russello Subject: Re: [RFC-PATCH v2 1/2] send-email: quote-email populates the fields Date: Mon, 30 May 2016 01:38:02 +0200 Message-ID: <16f3b6f8-0a4c-3102-8723-e4dfacc51906@grenoble-inp.org> References: <1464031829-6107-1-git-send-email-tom.russello@grenoble-inp.org> <1464369102-7551-1-git-send-email-tom.russello@grenoble-inp.org> <1464369102-7551-2-git-send-email-tom.russello@grenoble-inp.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, jordan.de-gea@grenoble-inp.org, erwan.mathoniere@grenoble-inp.org, samuel.groot@grenoble-inp.org, e@80x24.org, aaron@schrab.com, gitster@pobox.com To: Matthieu Moy X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon May 30 01:38:14 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1b7AHd-0007sY-C5 for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Mon, 30 May 2016 01:38:13 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753293AbcE2XiJ (ORCPT ); Sun, 29 May 2016 19:38:09 -0400 Received: from zm-smtpout-2.grenet.fr ([130.190.244.98]:45346 "EHLO zm-smtpout-2.grenet.fr" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752025AbcE2XiI (ORCPT ); Sun, 29 May 2016 19:38:08 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zm-smtpout-2.grenet.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id C39C520A5; Mon, 30 May 2016 01:38:03 +0200 (CEST) Received: from zm-smtpout-2.grenet.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (zm-smtpout-2.grenet.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id uiu4SOUlqs_a; Mon, 30 May 2016 01:38:03 +0200 (CEST) Received: from zm-smtpauth-2.grenet.fr (zm-smtpauth-2.grenet.fr [130.190.244.123]) by zm-smtpout-2.grenet.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF78B20A4; Mon, 30 May 2016 01:38:03 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zm-smtpauth-2.grenet.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3D992077; Mon, 30 May 2016 01:38:03 +0200 (CEST) Received: from zm-smtpauth-2.grenet.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (zm-smtpauth-2.grenet.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ipZdTC5i3LLh; Mon, 30 May 2016 01:38:03 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [192.168.0.19] (1.23.6.84.rev.sfr.net [84.6.23.1]) by zm-smtpauth-2.grenet.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5C31E2064; Mon, 30 May 2016 01:38:03 +0200 (CEST) User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.1.0 In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On 05/28/16 16:35, Matthieu Moy wrote: >> +--quote-email=:: >> + Reply to the given email and automatically populate the "To:", "Cc:" and >> + "In-Reply-To:" fields. > > I think this is a bit too technical for a user documentation. To: and > Cc: is OK, but people need not know about "In-Reply-To:" to understand > this. See what the doc of --in-reply-to says. If you want to be > technical, you'd need to mention the References: field too. You have a point here. Maybe, we can explain that the `--quote-email` option behaves like a mailer when replying to someone without getting into details. > Talking about Reference: field, something your patch could do is to add > all references in to the references of the new email (see > what a mailer is doing when replying). This way, the recipient can still > get threading if the last message being replied-to is missing. I didn't know about this field, it looks like it appends all the parent message ID's. >> +"Re: ['s subject]". > > Perhaps `Re: ...` instead of double-quotes. Agreed. >> +if ($quote_email) { >> + my $error = validate_patch($quote_email); >> + $error and die "fatal: $quote_email: $error\nwarning: no patches were sent\n"; > > I know it's done this way elsewhere, but I don't like this "$error and > die", I'd rather see a proper if here. You're right, I'll change that in the next version. >> + if (defined $input_format && $input_format eq 'mbox') { > > To me, the input format refers to patch files, not the . > > I'm not sure anyone still use the "lots of email" format, and you are > not testing it. So, this is claiming that we have a feature without > being sure we have it nor that anyone's ever going to use it. You summed up the situation well. > I'd just drop this "if" and the "else" branch, and just assume the email > file is a normal email file. I'll do that. Thank you for the review.