![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On Wed, 29 Sep 2004, George Anzinger wrote: > Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2004 17:14:38 -0700 > From: George Anzinger <george@mvista.com> > To: Jesper Juhl <juhl-lkml@dif.dk> > Cc: Christoph Lameter <clameter@sgi.com>, Ulrich Drepper <drepper@redhat.com>, > johnstul@us.ibm.com, Ulrich.Windl@rz.uni-regensburg.de, jbarnes@sgi.com, > linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, libc-alpha@sources.redhat.com > Subject: Re: patches inline in mail > > Jesper Juhl wrote: > > Unrelated to the CLOCK_PROCESS/THREAD_CPUTIME_ID discussion, just wanted to > > comment on the 'patches inline vs attached' bit. > > > > On Wed, 29 Sep 2004, George Anzinger wrote: > > > > > > > Christoph Lameter wrote: > > > > > > > On Wed, 29 Sep 2004, George Anzinger wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Christoph Lameter wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Please, when sending patches, attach them. This avoids problems with > > > > > mailers, > > > > > on both ends, messing with white space. They still appear in line, at > > > > > least in > > > > > some mailers (mozilla in my case). > > > > > > > > > > > > The custom on lkml, for Linus and Andrew is to send them inline. I also > > > > prefer them inline. Will try to remember sending attachments when > > > > sending a > > > > patch to you. > > > > > > I think they WILL be inline as well as attached if you attach them. The > > > difference is that in both presentations neither mailer will mess with > > > white > > > space. This means that long lines will not be wrapped and tabs vs space > > > will > > > not be changed. > > > > > > > Not all mailers show attachments inline. Mailers that do usually depend on > > the mimetype of the attachment when choosing to show inline or not. pine (my > > personal favorite) show attachments with a text/plain and similar mime-type > > inline, but a not all mailers use that (I see a lot of attached patches on > > lkml that don't show inline, and that's somewhat annoying). > > So we should make sure that the mailer uses the right mime-type. I suppose > that depends on the mailer? > > > > It's also harder to reply and comment on bits of a patch when your mailer > > does not include attachments inline in a reply (even if it did show them > > inline while reading the mail). > > Having to save the patch, open it in a text editor and then cut'n'paste bits > > of it into the reply mail is a pain. Same goes for having to save & open it > > in order to read it in the first place. > > We agree. Still, I have been bitten too many times by misshandled white space > to trust pure inlineing. Likewise on picking it up one would usually past it > in the mail (I suppose) where as the attachment is through the mailer and less > prone to missing a character. > When I include patches inline in mails I use pine's "Read File" functionality. Pressing CTRL+R and then specifying a filename causes pine to read the file and place it inline exactely as read from the file. So no whitespace damage by cut'n'paste. I don't know, but I would suspect that other mailers would have similar functionality.?? > The best answer, I think, is attachments that show as inline AND stay that way > on the reply. > That would be just as fine as plain inline, but I think it'll be difficult to find a way to do that that works universally with all mailers. -- Jesper Juhl - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2005-03-22 14:06 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||