Re: [RFC] send-email: avoid duplicate In-Reply-To and References headers

Eric Wong writes: > Junio C Hamano wrote: >> >> I think it is sensibleto give priority to the --in-reply-to option >> given from the command line over the in-file one. I am not sure if >> we want to drop references, though. Wouldn't it make more sense to >>

Re: [RFC] send-email: avoid duplicate In-Reply-To and References headers

Junio C Hamano wrote: > Eric Wong writes: > > When parsing an mbox, it is possible to get existing In-Reply-To > > and References headers blindly appended into the headers of > > message we generate. This is probably the wrong thing to do > > and we should

Re: [RFC] send-email: avoid duplicate In-Reply-To and References headers

Eric Wong writes: > When parsing an mbox, it is possible to get existing In-Reply-To > and References headers blindly appended into the headers of > message we generate. This is probably the wrong thing to do > and we should prioritize what was given in the command-line, >

[RFC] send-email: avoid duplicate In-Reply-To and References headers

When parsing an mbox, it is possible to get existing In-Reply-To and References headers blindly appended into the headers of message we generate. This is probably the wrong thing to do and we should prioritize what was given in the command-line, cover letter, and previously-sent messages. One