On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 01:47:53PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes: > > > These should generally never happen, as we already > > concatenate multiples in subjects into a single line. But > > let's be defensive, since not encoding them means we will > > output malformed headers. > > In this particular case, wouldn't it be more conservative and defensive to > produce malformed headers so that the patch won't leave the > originator? No. If you go back to xzer's original mail, the malformed headers didn't cause messages not to be sent. They just resulted in corrupted and missing data on the receiver side. I don't think we can rely on any MUA or MTA having a particular behavior for malformed mail. Some of them may complain, but many won't. > I have a suspicion that mailinfo would choke on the output of this > one, even though I didn't try. Actually, it does quite well. Without "-k", mailinfo turns it into a single line, which is what I would expect. With "-k", the info file contains: Author: Jeff King Email: peff@xxxxxxxx Subject: this is a long Subject: subject line with Subject: many lines in it Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2011 11:30:43 -0500 which "git am" turns back into the original multi-line subject. So I think it's definitely the right thing to do. Not only does it avoid us generating malformed mail, but because existing mailinfo handles it sanely, it makes it easy to do a "preserve-newlines" patch on top (which I'm still not sure is a great idea, but I can see the use in certain circumstances). -Peff -- 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