From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com (pb-smtp20.pobox.com [173.228.157.52]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E69078825 for ; Wed, 26 Jun 2024 13:33:32 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=173.228.157.52 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1719408814; cv=none; b=jzfR79tu2Qaa9+nv2fA0NIba6SzNYmvMyg5oWc/R4IEoHWC/wdSoK8mwxfTvMcW9QiVfJ2LEJClsNdjDwgBugoskuj2kH5MoW4DOKyMW2rd1y/KHevmG+J3xJVVi1DoQL9iDWWyY6lu9CrMLp2F5+P5NorU9DrTuw6c2c7mRFwY= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1719408814; c=relaxed/simple; bh=JxrnyPAw1leBvlFXr4wlrw+Re9OM42iDVCe5nGPhPbs=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=E3Qz3x21nWLtvKwzXXDwqJwFHIHbPWzBEwfFTOjiE2d21b69m9vPGaybDckf2TwkR8oGcFBxTsMOwLlMAemYPBUfamKJECuXEbyP2kpqdSbHE+Zs13xuQmg+dGtzp37THsy11sX+gE5mfs1cwLsftmz0XhRgPChX8BAlMU33fxs= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=pobox.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pobox.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b=hZS3qBUX; arc=none smtp.client-ip=173.228.157.52 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=pobox.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pobox.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b="hZS3qBUX" Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 62F4E31763; Wed, 26 Jun 2024 09:33:32 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=sasl; bh=JxrnyPAw1leB vlFXr4wlrw+Re9OM42iDVCe5nGPhPbs=; b=hZS3qBUXDopuBURnzseif1+uFV6p 9jiB578wjhqdDlAU/2vI5KGCBxQXA8mD74s0LIPOlwZI/i1O7NvQUm7A2Gzt5ZgZ JWgxDk2XVNVwinHlcyMxIg60uoW8npkRPpwEsXuSao0tCoJd7noJlDPDrgUs5k6K HaKA5MTw+3yCMtM= Received: from pb-smtp20.sea.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B0EF31762; Wed, 26 Jun 2024 09:33:32 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.125.219.236]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 32CF931761; Wed, 26 Jun 2024 09:33:26 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: =?utf-8?B?Q3PDs2vDoXM=?= Bence Cc: Subject: Re: [PATCH resend] git-send-email: Use sanitized address when reading mbox body In-Reply-To: <202fc42e-c5be-4a4b-a135-302d8fbf6b2a@prolan.hu> (=?utf-8?B?IkNzw7Nrw6Fz?= Bence"'s message of "Wed, 26 Jun 2024 10:58:03 +0200") References: <20240621092721.2980939-2-csokas.bence@prolan.hu> <202fc42e-c5be-4a4b-a135-302d8fbf6b2a@prolan.hu> Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2024 06:33:24 -0700 Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 X-Pobox-Relay-ID: AAB0BF46-33C0-11EF-AC97-C38742FD603B-77302942!pb-smtp20.pobox.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cs=C3=B3k=C3=A1s Bence writes: >> In any case, if we were to move forward with this topic (whether >> "send to corrected $sc instead" or "$c is suspicious, do not add it >> to $cc" is picked as the direction), the motivation behind the >> design decision to treat the address taken from a trailer line >> differently needs to be explained better, I think. [...] >> Your proposed commit log message is the place to help them. > > Okay. So in short, I should add justification for trusting mbox > headers and not the message body, correct? We want these to be explained for future readers: (1) we stuff the sanitized address to @cc in this particular place, but we still let all other places copy the original taken from the message to @to or @cc (as in the original code). (2) the reason behind the above difference is because we trust less about the "address looking" strings that appear on the trailer lines. So, not just (2), but in order for the readers to understand why they should care about (2), they need to be told (1) as well. Thanks.