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 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 4F440C2BA2B for ; Fri, 17 Apr 2020 02:01:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 113CB21D93 for ; Fri, 17 Apr 2020 02:01:06 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b="KM+6TjYy" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728906AbgDQCBF (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Apr 2020 22:01:05 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp21.pobox.com ([173.228.157.53]:63491 "EHLO pb-smtp21.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725800AbgDQCBE (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Apr 2020 22:01:04 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp21.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A4388B721E; Thu, 16 Apr 2020 22:01:02 -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=Rvui+ZhldKsQaGAUTt1YEiugpwQ=; b=KM+6Tj YyXb0/kA8Zb5QQlXtl8sypiVp5emGyH8vO26evkk/5iWk8vpMugtiWF8BhiLqxMK FAEOK/oa38x1xnun7MUSGU67MfYQxYIHa4BdGYlEadzSOY2M8QpBLfrBwzg3xT4A ACjxWnlPY/jMnrL64MX5g8tgKfeJ5YEoKi/iA= 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=WErRYiQRzCkKAP0JfzqYz4S7cteFffKF f6T7UtqVOP636hZqhKDa2u1DD1gP942HF1qctxfcBdkGvCtRNDzhyccGQfB53s2M 2v1iJFggEr3ZNydEfePXM8o/LdcSFFiDyMa4kZXzjiiAPOTZzf+vFf+KMAUL9oKk G4yuEpZ6YWw= Received: from pb-smtp21.sea.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9CE41B721C; Thu, 16 Apr 2020 22:01:02 -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-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id DE806B7216; Thu, 16 Apr 2020 22:00:59 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Emma Brooks Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Eric Wong Subject: Re: [PATCH] Documentation: explain "mboxrd" pretty format References: <20200416041658.85100-1-me@pluvano.com> <20200417014713.GA20574@pluvano.com> Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2020 19:00:58 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20200417014713.GA20574@pluvano.com> (Emma Brooks's message of "Fri, 17 Apr 2020 01:47:13 +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: 48BBA73E-804F-11EA-BFB2-8D86F504CC47-77302942!pb-smtp21.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Emma Brooks writes: > On 2020-04-15 22:03:36-0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> > +Like 'email', but lines in the commit message starting with "From " >> > +(preceded by zero or more ">") are quoted with ">" so they aren't >> > +confused as starting a new commit. >> >> I am torn between rephrasing "starting a new commit" with "starting >> a new e-mail message", and keeping it as-is. Technically, the latter >> is more correct---the >From quoting is a technique to avoid starting >> a line with "From " in a reversible way, as pieces of e-mails in a >> single mailbox file needs to be split at the boundary. But in the >> context of format-patch, perhaps saying each "record" in the output >> file is a "commit" (not a piece of e-mail message) would probably be >> an acceptable white lie. > > While it is more accurate to say "starting a new email" rather than > "commit", I think it might be less confusing to say "starting a new > commit", if the reader isn't already familiar with how mbox works or its > variants, since the pretty formats control commit display and would > typically be thought about in terms of commits rather than emails. Exactly. That is why I said that I was torn between technical correctness and tool-specific description. "torn between" is quite different from "inclined to prefer the one different from yours" ;-)