From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.9 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43D991F463 for ; Tue, 24 Sep 2019 21:36:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2387648AbfIXVgk (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Sep 2019 17:36:40 -0400 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([104.130.231.41]:58944 "HELO cloud.peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S2387616AbfIXVgk (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Sep 2019 17:36:40 -0400 Received: (qmail 11500 invoked by uid 109); 24 Sep 2019 21:36:40 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.2) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with SMTP; Tue, 24 Sep 2019 21:36:40 +0000 Authentication-Results: cloud.peff.net; auth=none Received: (qmail 12852 invoked by uid 111); 24 Sep 2019 21:39:02 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with (TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Tue, 24 Sep 2019 17:39:02 -0400 Authentication-Results: peff.net; auth=none Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2019 17:36:38 -0400 From: Jeff King To: Christian Schoenebeck Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, berrange@redhat.com, stefanha@gmail.com, Greg Kurz , git@vger.kernel.org, antonios.motakis@huawei.com, dgilbert@redhat.com, Ian Kelling Subject: Re: git format.from (was: 9p: Fix file ID collisions) Message-ID: <20190924213638.GE20858@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <56046367.TiUlWITyhT@silver> <20190923222415.GA22495@sigill.intra.peff.net> <3312839.Zbq2WQg2AT@silver> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3312839.Zbq2WQg2AT@silver> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Sep 24, 2019 at 11:03:38AM +0200, Christian Schoenebeck wrote: > > Yes, the resulting mail would be correct, in the sense that it could be > > applied just fine by git-am. But I think it would be uglier. IOW, I > > consider the presence of the in-body From to be a clue that something > > interesting is going on (like forwarding somebody else's patch). So from > > my perspective, it would just be useless noise. Other communities may > > have different opinions, though (I think I have seen some kernel folks > > always including all of the possible in-body headers, including Date). > > But it seems like it makes sense to keep both possibilities. > > Exactly, current git behaviour is solely "prettier" (at first thought only > though), but does not address anything useful in real life. I wouldn't agree with that. By being pretty, it also is functionally more useful (I can tell at a glance whether somebody is sending a patch from another author). > Current git behaviour does cause real life problems though: Many email lists > are munging emails of patch senders whose domain is configured for requiring > domain's emails being DKIM signed and/or being subject to SPF rules (a.k.a > DMARC). So original sender's From: header is then automatically replaced by an > alias (by e.g. mailman): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DMARC#From:_rewriting > > For instance the email header: > > From: "Bob Bold" > > is automatically replaced by lists by something like > > From: "Bob Bold via Somelist" > > And since git currently always drops the From: line from the email's body if > sender == author, as a consequence maintainers applying patches from such > lists, always need to rewrite git history subsequently and have to replace > patch author's identity manually for each commit to have their correct, real > email address and real name in git history instead of something like > "Bob Bold via Somelist" > > So what do you find "uglier"? I prefer key info not being lost as default > behaviour. :-) Sure, for your list that munges From headers, always including an in-body From is way better. But for those of us _not_ on such lists, I'd much prefer not to force the in-body version on them. -Peff