Eric Wong <e@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > When parsing an mbox, it is possible to get existing In-Reply-To > and References headers blindly appended into the headers of > message we generate. This is probably the wrong thing to do > and we should prioritize what was given in the command-line, > cover letter, and previously-sent messages. > > One example I've noticed in the wild was: > > https://public-inbox.org/git/20161111124541.8216-17-vascomalmeida@xxxxxxx/raw > --- > I'm not completely sure this is what Vasco was doing in that > message, so it's an RFC for now... I think it is sensibleto give priority to the --in-reply-to option given from the command line over the in-file one. I am not sure if we want to drop references, though. Wouldn't it make more sense to just add what we got from the command line to what we read from the file? I dunno. > git-send-email.perl | 8 +++++++- > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/git-send-email.perl b/git-send-email.perl > index 068d60b3e6..5ab3d8585c 100755 > --- a/git-send-email.perl > +++ b/git-send-email.perl > @@ -1543,7 +1543,13 @@ foreach my $t (@files) { > elsif (!/^Date:\s/i && /^[-A-Za-z]+:\s+\S/) { > push @xh, $_; > } > - > + elsif (/^(?:References|In-Reply-To):/i) { > + if (defined $initial_reply_to || $thread) { > + warn > +"Ignoring $_ header in mbox body since it conflicts with\n > +--in-reply-to and --thread switches\n" > + } > + } > } else { > # In the traditional > # "send lots of email" format,