From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail.manjaro.org (mail.manjaro.org [116.203.91.91]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1D9FC36135 for ; Tue, 20 Feb 2024 19:38:28 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=116.203.91.91 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1708457911; cv=none; b=ogcuwlKSFA1wruSzTBXfcB8ojCbQMfjwuDzKekm9pm295qLs4W0ObLl81lR3LQta6ZjvsnoXPt0rQElKvlA/fMcUeO+BI58Ns+tyaRFnFDyI+kmB/P3FmuRNd4fWnSiVfBBW/0prvntX8yuciteyOwEDVONpOsnlD0HghGmWXgg= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1708457911; c=relaxed/simple; bh=DRz/CNBi31Og0Zp0L2vXT2FqRD95KJbM/HDcA+njTOE=; h=MIME-Version:Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References: Message-ID:Content-Type; b=RfHQGQTL0hA9LzUpGiWarrIPiD7Hc7RJxkPF+gdFa9AnqJSuCQk8F6FM5/H2rhFPZVkiNjsU94YPYoq9a84hhrHTjs7Pe3QDh5+2xVhNF9J1uGuWdmgGbRirHhMQgH004seJ35oqYxBobAUMPg/Uv5UBazH7AfO6hjRJfinW8So= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=manjaro.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=manjaro.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=manjaro.org header.i=@manjaro.org header.b=hPt7CXa2; arc=none smtp.client-ip=116.203.91.91 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=manjaro.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=manjaro.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=manjaro.org header.i=@manjaro.org header.b="hPt7CXa2" Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=manjaro.org; s=2021; t=1708457907; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=kmCK2/l8wKPgRF3e+YWH+rvBI1LRlPEzXeAW2EqPnl4=; b=hPt7CXa2pHcEqRrphtmeeywOjNkf8ht32q8rudHN3fcO8TIlC+dUd4Omq6m9g+077hLbhD L8nZx2FViWApOamIGkp5S9dblHBzq7ixxwL6w/a74wPCtkMLnqc3n6Or1V881m2y5Lb1h8 RaftRZxSaDegO4DEPTCPFnqIIxxpmWjbKFbhf7N2fKZxqzvR85AGR8z/mbJWdVKWsAzWCW VnHw7g7SaE3sdIAXyaxS+kDCqyusqJk5P1bKfgEDY7pI2+Lnbt1JuBYlXz9JCZ7ITrT5En a4BBAnoG1xXjZq0pWCmeZtaT4rnGOXeQgaaW9DAgitNUDxS4KhAxOQEBZQJHbA== Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2024 20:38:26 +0100 From: Dragan Simic To: Junio C Hamano Cc: git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] documentation: send-email: use camel case consistently In-Reply-To: References: <33abb630c1d089e39ff48f04e586b1c0@manjaro.org> <9d0022ba5666223af94bbf450909b1ba@manjaro.org> Message-ID: X-Sender: dsimic@manjaro.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Authentication-Results: ORIGINATING; auth=pass smtp.auth=dsimic@manjaro.org smtp.mailfrom=dsimic@manjaro.org On 2024-02-20 19:29, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Dragan Simic writes: > >> If you insist on using "CC", I'd be fine with that, but frankly, I >> think >> that would actually be confusing to the users. > > I do not insist; my job is to just reject what is not correct. > > In this particular case, I do not think Cc is outright wrong; it > is near the borderline, but I do not know which side of that line it > sits. > > I gave you one possible rule to decide what to capitalize (namely, > acronyms are spelled in all caps and that is how we capitalize > http.proxySSLCert and imap.preformattedHTML) and if we adopt that > rule, then sendemail.supressCc would be incorrect, simply because > carbon-copy should be spelled CC. Please, let me remind you that I already fully agreed with using "SSL". The same applies to "HTML", for example, but "Cc" should be an exception to that rule, IMHO. > You need to give an alternative criteria that is easy to understand > for future developers and follow, and explain your choice in the > proposed commit log message: "We spell acronyms in all caps like > HTML and SSL, but in the case of carbon-copy, we spell it as Cc > because ...". > > You need to fill that "..." is in your proposed log message to > explain the choice you made in your patch text. More importantly, > it is to help future developers so that they can easily follow the > same rule to spell the variable names they invented in a way > consistent with the rule you followed in this patch. Agreed, I'll provide a detailed rationale for using "Cc" vs. "SSL" in the commit description for v3, with a few references.