On 09/20/2010 08:46 AM, Ãvar ArnfjÃrà Bjarmason wrote: > On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 12:20, ÅtÄpÃn NÄmec <stepnem@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Russ Allbery <rra@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: >> >>> ÅtÄpÃn NÄmec <stepnem@xxxxxxxxx> writes: >>>> Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@xxxxxxxxx> writes: >>> >>>>> Maybe format-patch could provide another mode to produce patches that >>>>> do not include unnecessary headers (in particular, leaving out the >>>>> difficult "From " line and using UTF-8 instead of quoted-printable for >>>>> the "From: " line). >>> >>>> FWIW, the quoted-printable `From:' encoding has always annoyed me -- I >>>> replace it manually with my name & address in UTF-8 every time I send >>>> out a patch. What is the reason format-patch does that (and if there is >>>> a reason not to change the default, could an option to disable it be >>>> provided)? >>> >>> Well, it's required if you're going to actually send the result directly >>> as a mail message, since the RFC 5322 format requires headers be encoded >>> using RFC 2047 encoding. >> >> Right... thanks for pointing that out. So the problem I'm seeing is >> actually different -- some software (including Mutt and the mailing >> list/archive software used by this list) appears to have problems with >> quoted-printable, but not with base64. >> >> To take my name as example: when I send mail from Mutt, it is encoded as >> "=?utf-8?B?xaB0xJtww6FuIE7Em21lYw==?=", i.e. base64, and both Mutt and >> the vger archive seem to decode it properly, whereas the >> quoted-printable version produced by fromat-patch, i.e. >> "=?utf-8?q?=C5=A0t=C4=9Bp=C3=A1n=20N=C4=9Bmec?=" in this case, is left >> undecoded by Mutt and mis-decoded in the ML archive as far as I have >> seen. I'm not sure about other software (Gnus seems to be able to deal >> with both correctly), but perhaps it would make sense to switch to >> base64 in format-patch? > > The advantage of quoted-printable is the printable part. It's at least > somewhat human readable, e.g.: > > =?UTF-8?q?=C3=86var=20Arnfj=C3=B6r=C3=B0=20Bjarmason?= > > I have some chance of spotting a typo or something in there if I look > at the raw E-Mail (which I often do), but not with base64. > > Are we sure we're correctly encoding quoted-printable? E.g. maybe > ?UTF-8? instead of ?utf-8? would work? It seems odd that a widely used > client like Mutt would screw up such a widely used encoding. I don't think we should be producing lower-case utf-8 anymore, since 1.6.4 I think. I have encountered platforms, like older Solaris or IRIX, that indeed did not understand utf-8, but did understand UTF-8. So, it is something to check out. Perhaps Mutt or the mailing list archive were running on such a system? -Brandon -- 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