On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 08:47:39AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Jeff King <p...@peff.net> writes: > > >> ... <helper function to see if the user is the author> ... > >> +} > > > > Nice, I'm glad you handled this case properly. I've wondered if we > > should have an option to do a similar test when writing out the "real" > > message format. I.e., to put the extra "From" line in the body of the > > message when !is_current_user(). Traditionally we have just said "that > > is the responsibility of the MUA you use", and let send-email handle it. > > But it means people who do not use send-email have to reimplement the > > feature themselves. > > I am not sure if I follow. Do you mean that you have to remove > fewer lines if you omit Date/From when it is from you in the first > place?
Sorry, I think I confused you by going off on a tangent. The rest of my email was about dropping unnecessary lines from the inline view. But here I was talking about another possible use of the "is user the author" function. For the existing view, we show: From: A U Thor <aut...@example.com> Date: ... Subject: [PATCH] whatever body and if committer != author, we expect the MUA to convert that to: From: C O Mitter <commit...@example.com> Date: ... Subject: [PATCH] whatever From: A U Thor <aut...@example.com> body That logic happens in git-send-email right now, but given that your patch adds the "are we the author?" function, it would be trivial to add a "--sender-is-committer" option to format-patch to have it do it automatically. That saves the MUA from having to worry about it. > People who do not use send-email (like me) slurp the output > 0001-have-gostak-distim-doshes.patch into their MUA editor, tell the > MUA to use the contents on the Subject: line as the subject, and > remove what is redundant, including the Subject. Because the output > cannot be used as-is anyway, I do not think it is such a big deal. That is one way to do it. Another way is to hand the output of format-patch to your MUA as a template, making it a starting point for a message we are about to send. No manual editing is necessary in that case, unless the "From" header does not match the sender identity. > And those who have a custom mechanism to stuff our output in their > MUA's outbox, similar to what imap-send does, would already have to > have a trivial parser to read the first part of our output up to the > first blank line (i.e. parsing out the header part) and formatting > the information it finds into a form that is understood by their > MUA. Not necessarily. The existing format is an rfc822 message, which mailers understand already. It's perfectly cromulent to do: git format-patch --stdout "$@" >mbox && mutt -f mbox and use mutt's "resend-message" as a starting point for sending each message. No editing is necessary except for adding recipients (which you can also do on the command-line to format-patch). > Omitting From: or Date: lines would not help those people who > already have established the procedure to handle the "Oh, this one > is from me" case, or to send the output always with the Sender: and > keeping the From: intact. So,... Right, my point was to help people who _should_ have implemented the "oh, this one is from me" case, but were too lazy to do so (and it's actually a little tricky to get right, because you might have to adjust the mime headers to account for encoded author names). -Peff -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html