From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Greg KH Subject: Re: Suppressing auto-cc for specific addresses Date: Mon, 8 Aug 2011 14:11:02 -0700 Message-ID: <20110808211102.GA3233@kroah.com> References: <4E3EF38A.9010307@gmail.com> <20110807234634.GA3236@kroah.com> <20110808204448.GF18294@sigill.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: Jeff King , David Aguilar , "git@vger.kernel.org" To: Daniel Mack X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Aug 08 23:11:17 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QqX6S-0002Wt-Q2 for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Mon, 08 Aug 2011 23:11:17 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752199Ab1HHVLM convert rfc822-to-quoted-printable (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Aug 2011 17:11:12 -0400 Received: from out3.smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.27]:34854 "EHLO out3.smtp.messagingengine.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752040Ab1HHVLK (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Aug 2011 17:11:10 -0400 Received: from compute5.internal (compute5.nyi.mail.srv.osa [10.202.2.45]) by gateway1.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28FFD206EC; Mon, 8 Aug 2011 17:11:10 -0400 (EDT) Received: from frontend1.messagingengine.com ([10.202.2.160]) by compute5.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 08 Aug 2011 17:11:10 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id :references:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding :in-reply-to; s=smtpout; bh=+P8evM3Wh2kNaFvVCNa1NowAEGM=; b=CcGt rM0cyj9QDC2jGp/ThE9DwEsc+QcRqfIFvPD1xUdJ6jZVQrxB0LAjRt+kq+zAU8Q1 JJvFBHCDwdk39i8EX0yWKy7RWJ5K3TqYEc+g2E5Vt0aM5lM9uS0YL1kAD524nW/d 2MTHA6f/nGynhFQvLAEQuMglP5+judEow9ft6SA= X-Sasl-enc: lkQSS3S1ohwlotveNBKvFSixqYPPlIlyJdi5SpENSi2t 1312837869 Received: from localhost (c-76-121-69-168.hsd1.wa.comcast.net [76.121.69.168]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id ABB16419EB3; Mon, 8 Aug 2011 17:11:09 -0400 (EDT) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Mon, Aug 08, 2011 at 11:01:12PM +0200, Daniel Mack wrote: > On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 10:44 PM, Jeff King wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 08, 2011 at 12:58:55PM +0200, Daniel Mack wrote: > > > >> On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 12:56 PM, David Aguilar = wrote: > >> > git send-email has a=A0--[no-]signed-off-by-cc option and config= uration > >> > variable.=A0-- > >> > >> I know, but that's not the point. It about having a certain addres= s > >> metioned in a ^Cc: line inside the patch and suppress sending off > >> emails to that specific address. And --suppress-cc currently only > >> allows categories to be set, not addresses. > > > > I'm kind of confused why you would mark an address as "cc", but not= cc > > it. Wouldn't it make sense to call the header something else? >=20 > Valid point. Even though Greg doesn't have a problem with the current > procedure as it stands, I see a problem in marking things for "Cc: > stable@kernel.org" just as a search pattern once they hit the Linux > mainline tree. Particularily because as it will end up in the > recipient list with git send-email, stable@ will get all the > follow-ups and discussions when people blindly hit the Reply-to-all > button (which we tell them to do). I for one would add > stable@kernel.org to my .gitconfig and be done with it, without ever > thinking about it again. No, that's a good thing, as the stable tree maintainer, I _want_ to see that discussion to verify that this patch really is something that should be applied to a stable kernel tree. Lots of patches have originally been tagged in this manner, added to th= e git tree, yet in discussion threads afterward, it's been determined tha= t this should not go to the stable tree. If I hadn't been on that thread in the first place, I would have missed that. So again, I have no objection to cc: stable@kernel.org, and in fact, encourage it. Don't worry, I can handle the email load :) thanks, greg k-h