Marius Storm-Olsen <marius@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > Recently, I sent out patches which were fixed up with --amend on older > commits. When I sent them out, the patches contained > Date: <more than 2 days old datestamp> > in the headers. Now, sending these mails is fine, and mail clients > generally handles it perfectly fine. However, after doing this I got > an email from postmaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, basically telling me to not > do this, since they get a lot of bounces where the return is marked > with > Diagnostic Code: smtp; 550 (4.5 DATE_IN_PAST_48_96 Date: is 48 to > 96 hours before Received: date) > > This is understandable. The question is, do we fix the tools to handle > this, so that emails are always generated with now() date, and the > commit content contains a tag for the original commit; or do we simply > say, always send patches to the mailing list with a current timestamp? I think the right solution would be for send-email to move Date: to the beginning of the body part, just like it adds an extra From: there when the sender is different from the author, and not lie about the mail transmission date. Then we won't lose the authorship date information in the resulting commit and will still keep the mailpath happy. -- 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
