From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: `git-send-email' doesn't specify `Content-Type' Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2007 03:51:20 -0500 Message-ID: <20071111085120.GD30299@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <87ode3klc7.fsf@chbouib.org> <20071110101420.GA21353@bulgaria> <20071110122528.GA4977@atjola.homenet> <20071110123505.GA24445@bulgaria> <20071110125126.GA7261@atjola.homenet> <20071111083224.GA30299@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20071111083915.GA18021@bulgaria> <20071111084117.GC30299@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20071111084515.GB18021@bulgaria> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Bj=F6rn?= Steinbrink , Johannes Schindelin , Ludovic =?iso-8859-1?Q?Court=E8s?= , git@vger.kernel.org To: Brian Swetland X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sun Nov 11 09:51:46 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1Ir8Xc-0007yq-Ay for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Sun, 11 Nov 2007 09:51:40 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752747AbXKKIvY (ORCPT ); Sun, 11 Nov 2007 03:51:24 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752753AbXKKIvY (ORCPT ); Sun, 11 Nov 2007 03:51:24 -0500 Received: from 66-23-211-5.clients.speedfactory.net ([66.23.211.5]:4546 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752394AbXKKIvX (ORCPT ); Sun, 11 Nov 2007 03:51:23 -0500 Received: (qmail 30341 invoked by uid 111); 11 Nov 2007 08:51:22 -0000 Received: from c-24-125-35-113.hsd1.va.comcast.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (24.125.35.113) (smtp-auth username relayok, mechanism cram-md5) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.32) with ESMTP; Sun, 11 Nov 2007 03:51:22 -0500 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Sun, 11 Nov 2007 03:51:20 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20071111084515.GB18021@bulgaria> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Sun, Nov 11, 2007 at 12:45:15AM -0800, Brian Swetland wrote: > > > What happens if the metadata has utf8 content and the patch itself has > > > some *other* non-ascii encoding (some iso-latin variant perhaps). [...] > > The body has to be in one encoding, so at the time that you know both > > encodings, you have to pick one and convert the data from the discarded > > encoding into the used encoding. > > That seems potentially bad in that the transport (mailed patches) could > be altering the contents of the patch. Or is this process reversed when > the patch is finally applied? My answer was for "how do you stick two things with different encoding in the same mail" (which applies to the name + commit message situation). However, we don't actually _have_ an encoding for the patch data. We just assume that it matches the metadata. -Peff