On Sat, 2017-07-08 at 12:32 +1000, Daniel Axtens wrote:
> Stephen Finucane <step...@that.guru> writes:
>
> > On Sat, 2017-07-08 at 00:24 +1000, Daniel Axtens wrote:
> > > The fuzz fixups made the test too strict ("if not subject" rather than
> > > "if subject is None") in an attempt to catch broken subject headers.
> > > This broke parsing of messages with an empty subject.
> > >
> > > Fix it and add a test.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Daniel Axtens <d...@axtens.net>
> >
> > Is a mail with an empty subject really valid for our use cases?
>
> You can get a valid patch with an empty subject. It's dumb and people
> shouldn't do it, but it is not broken per se.
That's fair.
Reviewed-by: Stephen Finucane <step...@that.guru>
...and applied.
_______________________________________________
Patchwork mailing list
Patchwork@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/patchwork
