On 23/08/2021 20:27, Jeff King wrote:
But either that should go into its own patch, or the commit message
should be modified to explain that it is covering not just
in-reply-to/references, but we think this fixes all similar variables.
Fixed, opted for latter [1].
You'd want something like the patch below (and possibly something
similar for the $subject handling).
Thanks a lot! my last question for the patch would now be, how do I use
your snippet? Do I add you to S-o-b of the single patch, do I split the
patches with the second S-o-b being yours, or do I submit only the first
and you will submit the second?
Both of the new tests fail without your patch and pass with it, but:
- note the weird behavior I found with --in-reply-to; this is
something we might want to address at the same time
I think this case must error? The definition of the "--in-reply-to" does
not declare it as a default, so it must be enforced (and it is), but
it's also very unintuitive the file value is discarded. Who would decide
the behaviour spec?
- applying your patch fails the earlier t9001.52 ("In-Reply-To without
--chain-reply-to"). I didn't dig into what's going on there.
Fixed [1].
Best regards,
Marvin
[1]
https://github.com/mhaeuser/git/commit/5f2ff790cc0d0d779bc252b08f9c9c632c4ff01c
