[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87mspkqajj.fsf@intel.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2024 20:00:16 +0300
From: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@...el.com>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: workflows@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 2/2] Documentation: process: Recommend to put Cc:
tags after cutter '---' line
On Tue, 23 Apr 2024, Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 23, 2024 at 07:37:34PM +0300, Jani Nikula wrote:
>> On Tue, 23 Apr 2024, Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
>> > On Tue, Apr 23, 2024 at 05:30:49PM +0300, Jani Nikula wrote:
>> >> The Cc's on the mailing list archive are harder to dig up, and do not
>> >> accurately reflect the same information.
>> >
>> > How comes? These Cc: are 1:1 mapped to the Cc: email headers.
>>
>> Patch Cc's get mapped to email Cc's depending on personal git sendemail
>> configuration.
>>
>> People can add more Cc's in the emails when sending.
>
> So, which exactly a proof why email headers are better for that, as they
> reflect _reality_.
No, I think the point is, commit message Cc != email message Cc, they
just have the same name.
Similar to, say, Reviewed-by, a commit message Cc may turn into an email
message Cc. But you can't make assumptions about it one way or the
other.
Imagine the commit message Cc was named "Attn:" and handled
appropriately. That probably reflects a lot of commit message Cc usage.
BR,
Jani.
>
>> Mailing list Cc's actually present in the archives depend on mailing
>> list manager configuration, and, in some cases, even the personal list
>> preferences of individual subscribers.
--
Jani Nikula, Intel
Powered by blists - more mailing lists