From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.0 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id B111E20248 for ; Thu, 4 Apr 2019 18:06:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729356AbfDDSG6 (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 Apr 2019 14:06:58 -0400 Received: from mail-wr1-f66.google.com ([209.85.221.66]:47015 "EHLO mail-wr1-f66.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726698AbfDDSG6 (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 Apr 2019 14:06:58 -0400 Received: by mail-wr1-f66.google.com with SMTP id t17so4874785wrw.13 for ; Thu, 04 Apr 2019 11:06:57 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:mail-followup-to :references:mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to :accept-language:user-agent; bh=RdfNiC7gPjQKchqIFYoNIVJH+b5D0Nxc0sEuiDFBnKQ=; b=I+DSclWENhEzBoedGvEj4k5no3rblZ2kRduVSCgTHtF/Tqo+mJ3zX5YWENhv2S4g2F gXookbAZgbC5I7SMlqdF88CP/73WgUmcW9F1Z9byLzwqk7Ozq3n/YDc20Pb3fVoimTxQ ty9fyJjJvJdDizXwkCVj8WeFMhR8JVX6vQZ8FAJLXn0NTnrkiYBFLDQQXhkf9XoQn+Tq 9PTp5MwQCwkYn0CE48r0gbSxD1k/t/N7c5igGx3xS8EuarzjdjduYzYbaaIV4GXPU8qP yYbHL/wTorFcF3ewbaug4GPMTKCZeeuFhC8cyx1WT335XItJqZnLHkSO/uvOu4aJM5vN i6iA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id :mail-followup-to:references:mime-version:content-disposition :in-reply-to:accept-language:user-agent; bh=RdfNiC7gPjQKchqIFYoNIVJH+b5D0Nxc0sEuiDFBnKQ=; b=DEhMQ/I8UxCMykhyXooIcWcOTJhKAA3+stJnsQXsGfKPXpG2XQdfWo+yOWAHyqsmXf KU5RuwoDPakB5jSEbd2OzlEkWLXGXBIU8+u6PrUgW0L39Eg/1b0TYtl/qKwoxCPOM4+S 4Gon1HX0DBZxqteh8Ylkx8In7i4AIN9lA7gN40zL04Cp9M8UVpwTRLf6ZB4vNdbllo2o 8avUEg7rcL0B3zeaxwljmJSl66i+OzN9PhYACxb7hn+c61i9YugXHGkHWO69v2rZd8V2 1Tu9KiSx0BIrC2KCXcNZBAa4asl2GW6fv5JvYcMNit9rnVBRI8WC8pOXdw60C5taANVT VESA== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVdu6js2nEvA+4H71XeOyfislBAwkn0tfEYPNwvXyY1RvAI+p7Q 7k3ofpRFwRigvWw9Oxz/0jk= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxRzy4DD5PSC9/e8oUbLc2iZKIcWxV0XcuMfVacgECI4t6GJGaT0HboQeFwocz9pnMSta242g== X-Received: by 2002:adf:ee50:: with SMTP id w16mr5004187wro.293.1554401216473; Thu, 04 Apr 2019 11:06:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from jak-t480s ([2a02:908:2813:42c0:fdb4:7ddd:ea6b:efd2]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id d3sm31539432wmf.46.2019.04.04.11.06.55 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Thu, 04 Apr 2019 11:06:55 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 4 Apr 2019 20:06:53 +0200 From: Julian Andres Klode To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Junio C Hamano , Git List Mailing Subject: Re: "Problems" with git format-patch --thread email header ordering Message-ID: <20190404180653.curtoo7yot6tpqfk@jak-t480s> Mail-Followup-To: Julian Andres Klode , Linus Torvalds , Junio C Hamano , Git List Mailing References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: de-DE, de, en-GB, en-US, en User-Agent: NeoMutt/20180716 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Mar 15, 2019 at 09:59:25AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Thu, Mar 14, 2019 at 9:47 PM Junio C Hamano wrote: > > > > Linus Torvalds writes: > > > > > While it's true that header ordering isn't specified, there's a common > > > "canonical" order that the headers are listed in. To quote rfc822: > > > ... > > > body must occur AFTER the headers. It is recommended > > > that, if present, headers be sent in the order "Return- > > > Path", "Received", "Date", "From", "Subject", "Sender", > > > "To", "cc", etc. > > > > I obviously won't do the last one myself, but if the issue is only > > to swap from and date, then this may be sufficient, perhaps? > > I'm not actually sure _what_ the order requirements for gmail are, > since gmail itself doesn't seem to honor them. Does the order of the > Message-ID header line matter, for example? > > I don't think it's the order of the From/Date lines, actually, because > google itself doesn't do that. > > What Thomas Found out was that the exact same email with > > Message-Id/From/Date/Subject/To > > (in that order) does not work, but > > Date/From/Subject/To/Message-Id > > does work. Weird and "wonderful". But there might be a lot of other > orderings that work or don't. > > Having looked through some other emails, I know that > > From/To/Subject/Date/Message-Id > Subject/To/References/From/Message-ID/Date > > also works. Which makes me suspect that it's the Message-ID line that matters. I also know that gmail rewrites the Message-ID / creates one if it is missing or "odd" (such as ends in a .). It those probably makes sense in that twisted world view to require that to be fairly late... -- debian developer - deb.li/jak | jak-linux.org - free software dev ubuntu core developer i speak de, en