On Fri, Dec 21, 2007 at 09:43:48AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > The option name feels as if it is somehow affecting From: but > this is all about recipients. It needs to be named better. > > Even more importantly, git-send-email has too many places that > pick up additional recipients. I doubt --suppress-foo to > suppress one such source "foo" is sustainable. We should try to > clean up the mess, not adding to it. Yay, even better that we're going to evaluate the sucker (I was just complaining about this yesterday to someone, so how apropos that it comes up on-list). First and foremost, I think git-send-email should not default to anything. It was quite a surprise, the first time I tried to use it, to discover I had to add two options to ~/.gitconfig just for sane behavior. Never mind that I couldn't suppress the author-cc. I think that a naive "git send-email --to bob@xxxxxxx foo.patch" should only go to bob, period. We can then add ways to auto-cc. I don't mind typing the extra bits. Heck, we could even define a --review that does what is currently the default - cc-everyone-who-might-care-as-we-go-upstream. Joel -- Life's Little Instruction Book #99 "Think big thoughts, but relish small pleasures." Joel Becker Principal Software Developer Oracle E-mail: joel.becker@xxxxxxxxxx Phone: (650) 506-8127 - 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
