On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 07:13:22PM -0400, Jeff King wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 01:53:52PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> > Matthieu Moy <matthieu....@grenoble-inp.fr> writes:
> > >>> If it's not in the body of the message, then where is it?
> > >>
> > >> This point is clarified in the thread
> > >> http://marc.info/?l=linux-wireless&m=147625930203434&w=2, which is
> > >> with my upstream maintainer.
> > >
> > > Which explicitly states that the syntax is not [$number], but # $number,
> > > right?
> > But I do not think that works, either. Let's step back.
> > People write things like these
> > Cc: Stable <sta...@vger.kernel.org> # 4.8
> > Cc: Stable <sta...@vger.kernel.org> [4.8+]
> > in the trailer part in the body of the message. Are these lines
> > meant to be usable if they appear as Cc: headers of an outgoing
> > piece of e-mail as-is?
> I think the answer is pretty clearly no. It's just that historically we
> have auto-munged it into something useful. I think the viable options
> are basically:
> 1. Tell people not to do that, and to do something RFC compliant like
> "Stable [4.8+]" <sta...@vger.kernel.org>. This is a little funny
> for git because we otherwise do not require things like
> rfc-compliant quoting for our name/email pairs. But it Just Works
> without anybody having to write extra code, or worry about corner
> cases in parsing.
> 2. Drop everything after the trailing ">". This gives a valid rfc2822
> cc, and people can pick the "# 4.8" from the cc line in the body.
Comments, surrounded by parenthesis are allowed after the ">" according
to the RFC, just plain dropping everything comming after that would
break that support.