From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NGBF6-0000xG-Mr for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 03 Dec 2009 07:57:08 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NGBF1-0000sP-4k for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 03 Dec 2009 07:57:08 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=45170 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NGBF0-0000s7-RE for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 03 Dec 2009 07:57:02 -0500 Received: from mail.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20]:43904) by monty-python.gnu.org with smtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1NGBF0-0002fx-2Q for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 03 Dec 2009 07:57:02 -0500 Message-ID: <4B17B599.6050708@gmx.net> Date: Thu, 03 Dec 2009 13:56:57 +0100 From: Carl-Daniel Hailfinger MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Unclear committer situation References: <4B16B483.6070605@codemonkey.ws> <4B16BC1E.5050505@codemonkey.ws> In-Reply-To: <4B16BC1E.5050505@codemonkey.ws> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Anthony Liguori Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Alexander Graf , Artyom Tarasenko On 02.12.2009 20:12, Anthony Liguori wrote: > Artyom Tarasenko wrote: >> I thought attaching a second copy were the way to send the patch >> properly. >> > > Attaching as an application/octet-stream is not terribly helpful. It > basically means you've attached a binary blob. > >> Is the proper way described somewhere? >> > > The proper way is to use a mailer that isn't broken. Attaching > everything as "application/octet-stream" is broken. Some mailers do the right thing if the attachment name ends in .txt (maybe that helps with gmail). Regards, Carl-Daniel -- Developer quote of the month: "We are juggling too many chainsaws and flaming arrows and tigers."