Hi, On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 11:45 PM, Lukas Sandström <luksan@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > The actual change is that mailinfo doesn't look for in-body headers > at all if --no-inbody-headers is passed. git-am now passes this option > to mailinfo when rebasing. after all the earlier discussion and a lot of thinking, I have to say, that IMHO, this is the best option as it doesn't rely on heuristics and now that you chose a descriptive command line switch, even the small problem of "why exactly is this switch here?" seems to go away. As I have no experience in git's codebase at all, I'll leave the commenting on the patch itself to the people with clue, but conceptionally, this feels much better than the method 1 > This won't handle the case when a "bad" patch is passed to git-am from > somewhere else than git rebase. of course, that leaves the question what "somewhere else" can contain. If it's just manual calls to git-am, this is a non-issue as it's easily fixed by the caller. If it's being called from other higher-level operations though, you might run into the same issue again. Here too, I can't really provide any meaningful input though as I just don't know well enough what really makes git tick. Just my two cents :-) Philip -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html