From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCH] format-patch: Produce better output with --inline or --attach Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2008 11:52:59 -0700 Message-ID: <7vmyjz5hmc.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <20080730052401.GC4034@sigill.intra.peff.net> <1217396973-82246-1-git-send-email-kevin@sb.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Kevin Ballard , git@vger.kernel.org, peff@peff.net To: Johannes Schindelin X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Jul 30 20:54:20 2008 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 1KOGoO-0000Wu-Hp for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Wed, 30 Jul 2008 20:54:12 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759489AbYG3SxK (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Jul 2008 14:53:10 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1759182AbYG3SxK (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Jul 2008 14:53:10 -0400 Received: from a-sasl-quonix.sasl.smtp.pobox.com ([208.72.237.25]:53967 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757697AbYG3SxJ (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Jul 2008 14:53:09 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-sasl-quonix.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 79C1343BC2; Wed, 30 Jul 2008 14:53:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pobox.com (ip68-225-240-211.oc.oc.cox.net [68.225.240.211]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by a-sasl-quonix.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 07DF543BC1; Wed, 30 Jul 2008 14:53:01 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: (Johannes Schindelin's message of "Wed, 30 Jul 2008 16:29:39 +0200 (CEST)") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: BF74B4DA-5E68-11DD-90BA-3113EBD4C077-77302942!a-sasl-quonix.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Johannes Schindelin writes: >> The second change is to always write the line termination character >> (default: newline) even when using --inline or --attach. This is simply >> to improve the aesthetics of the resulting message. When using --inline >> an email client should render the resulting message identically to the >> non-inline version. And when using --attach this adds a blank line >> preceding the attachment in the email, which is visually attractive. > > It appears that your patch has one uncontroversial and one controversial > part, then. Could you elaborate what's controversial about this?