On 06/08/2016 09:33 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Samuel GROOT <samuel.gr...@grenoble-inp.org> writes:
On 06/08/2016 07:37 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Samuel GROOT <samuel.gr...@grenoble-inp.org> writes:
+ printf("Adding cc: %s from From: header\n",
+ $1) unless $quiet;
+ printf("Adding to: %s from To:
header\n",
+ $addr) unless $quiet;
+ printf("Adding cc: %s from Cc:
header\n",
+ $addr) unless $quiet;
push @cc, $addr;
+ printf("Adding cc: %s from Cc: header\n",
+ $_) unless $quiet;
These make the end result prettier by not repeating the same address
twice, but is it just me who finds these inexplicable case
differences irritating? Shouldn't these field references in the
result mirror the field references in the origin of the information?
It makes sense only in the case below...
+ printf("Adding cc: %s from From: header\n",
+ $1) unless $quiet;
... because the sender should receive its own copy (at least to avoid
breaking threaded view in his mailer) and be cc-ed. By the way, we
should cc the sender when sending the cover letter too for the same
reason.
But in other cases, it seems pointless to display identical field
reference twice.
My comment may have been a bit too oblique. What I meant was
Adding cc: Samuel from From: header
looked strange, and I thought it would be better written
Adding Cc: Samuel from From: header
Same for
Adding to: Samuel from To: header
being strange, and a better version of it would be
Adding To: Samuel from To: header
Oh, I read your email a bit too fast, sorry.
I kept the sentence as it was except for trimmed part, but it makes
sense to have the same case. It will be fixed :-)
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
