On 17 January 2018 at 19:08, Christian Ludwig <chrissicool@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > In some projects contributions from groups are only accepted from a > common group email address. But every individual may want to recieve > replies to her own personal address. That's what we have 'Reply-To' > headers for in SMTP. s/recieve/receive/ > Introduce an optional '--reply-to' command line option. Unfortunately > the $reply_to variable name was already taken for the 'In-Reply-To' > header field. To reduce code churn, use $reply_address as variable > name instead. "To reduce ..." no longer describes the patch, since v2 actually performs that refactoring in patch 1/2. "Unfortunately ..." is correct, but seems less relevant now. Except: I suppose that a non-git.git patch which uses $reply_to could start misbehaving now that this series changes the meaning of that variable. Just thinking out loud, it could make some sense to take patch 1/2 for sanity, but to then *not* re-use $reply_to for a new purpose, but to actually take your v1-patch as 2/2. Or, this potential problem can perhaps be ignored (except in the commit message?).. > Signed-off-by: Christian Ludwig <chrissicool@xxxxxxxxx> "From:" and "Signed-off-by:" are different. Not sure if that's ok. Martin
