From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C95FC2D0EC for ; Tue, 7 Apr 2020 19:37:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C24E20730 for ; Tue, 7 Apr 2020 19:37:36 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b="vKbep5DY" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727193AbgDGThf (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Apr 2020 15:37:35 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com ([64.147.108.71]:61472 "EHLO pb-smtp2.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726339AbgDGThf (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Apr 2020 15:37:35 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B5D946714; Tue, 7 Apr 2020 15:37:33 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=5oa1d/flIl7FubsbufykAdMvJtM=; b=vKbep5 DYYMlNlnAGKhEUvelu4Zn9L11i2qXPZI6l3QX23E4TiaSkxwfwv8p96xZ/zM+yBb 4v+y0D+fJjpWB6yiaGqm7ceRO/J5saa6pyIQ9mFQXBhxCi/eBvotoyZR7vMbgTyZ RXRmknMk428iJ2gj1bCcPcYvlvLAf1s2oN7ok= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=WfofmcFSNMEJD2nxWIrL7/kyxOsM2q+e gK/RCsb6ydmX8n97gZD4ZRNFkt52otsYgW8njIr7oYGGgjBjAFfGteo7oDbsr3Ij XWfEL8FcgHPbZuhkOA4Lg2U2/SRzfnIsLz/q4CVmEcYuZYT+TfSvabce7xHTPtn1 5YSJLhQfLpQ= Received: from pb-smtp2.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2322D46710; Tue, 7 Apr 2020 15:37:33 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.74.119.39]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A8BED4670F; Tue, 7 Apr 2020 15:37:32 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Emma Brooks Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Denton Liu , Eric Sunshine , Jeff King Subject: Re: [PATCH] format-patch: teach --no-encode-headers References: <20200405231109.8249-1-me@pluvano.com> <20200407034622.GA42812@pluvano.com> Date: Tue, 07 Apr 2020 12:37:31 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20200407034622.GA42812@pluvano.com> (Emma Brooks's message of "Tue, 7 Apr 2020 03:46:22 +0000") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 39A580F2-7907-11EA-834A-D1361DBA3BAF-77302942!pb-smtp2.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Emma Brooks writes: > It's also too vague and it's not entirely clear from the option itself > what sort of encoding it refers to. I will change it to > --[no-]q-encode-headers and format.qEncodeHeaders in v2 unless there are > other suggestions. I actually did not mean to push you into that direction. We can, and do want to, keep the most generic "--[no-]encode-headers" if we do not anticipate us wanting to special case the Q encoding. A sample question to ask is "would it make sense to disable q-encoding but still perform other parts of 'encode headers'?" I haven't thought deeply about such questions, but as a proposer of this topic, you would certainly have, and I was hoping that you'd say things like "Q-encoding is the only thing that we do to munge headers, so there aren't any 'other parts of encoding headers' we need to worry about", "there are things like X, Y and Z that we do to the headers when we enable Q-encoding, but they all are what we do not want when we do not want the Q-encoding", which would be a very good sign that assures us that "--[no-]encode-headers" is a good name. Thanks.