Re: [PATCH] include/asm-arm/: Spelling fixes

[Jeff King <peff@peff.net>]

On Mon, Dec 17, 2007 at 01:27:20PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:

> >  	my $sanitized_sender = sanitize_address($sender);
> > -	make_message_id();
> > +	make_message_id() unless defined($message_id);
> 
> Isn't this called inside a loop?  If the outgoing message does not
> originally have "Message-Id:", does the loop correctly reinitialize
> $message_id to undef, or does this change make everybody reuse the same
> $message_id over and over again?

Yes, sorry. I realized it right after I sent the other out, but then a
repairman showed up to fix my non-working furnace. :)

The following needs to be squashed in (alternatively, the message_id
doesn't need to be a loop variable, so it could be cleaned up. But part
of me says that git-send-email is beyond hope for being clean).

diff --git a/git-send-email.perl b/git-send-email.perl
index 083466a..248d035 100755
--- a/git-send-email.perl
+++ b/git-send-email.perl
@@ -808,6 +808,7 @@ foreach my $t (@files) {
 			$references = "$message_id";
 		}
 	}
+	$message_id = undef;
 }
 
 if ($compose) {

> I have a feeling that --thread to format-patch is a misfeature.  Why is
> it needed if you are feeding the output to send-email?

I think it is a case of --thread being added for people not using
send-email, and then getting it misused. I am just trying to add a
sanity check to send-email in case the user does something silly (though
one could certainly argue that it is already hopelessly tied to
git-format-patch, and fixing git-format-patch is the right way to go).

> I wonder if stripping existing "Message-Id:" away just like we strip
> away "Date:" from @xh would be a much saner fix.

That is definitely wrong if we expect to re-use the in-reply-to and
references headers that already exist (though obviously we could strip
out all three of those headers and re-add our own).

I don't have a strong opinion. I never use git-send-email myself, but
was just trying to fix a reported bug.

-Peff