Re: [RFC][PATCH] update SubmittingPatches to clarify attachment policy

[Chris Wright]

* Dave Hansen (haveblue@xxxxxxxxxx) wrote:
> On Wed, 2005-05-04 at 13:16 -0400, Valdis.Kletnieks@xxxxxx wrote:
> > On Wed, 04 May 2005 10:01:56 PDT, Dave Hansen said:
> > 
> > > -6) No MIME, no links, no compression, no attachments.  Just plain text.
> > > +6) No MIME, no links, no compression.  Just plain text.
> > 
> > Logically buggy.  You can't have an attachment without the MIME markup that
> > *says* it's an attachment.  I think what you meant was "No Content-Type-Encoding":
> > i.e. 'none' is acceptable, but 'quoted-printable' (which causes all the
> > spurious =20 and =3D you sometimes see) and 'base64' (uuencode on steroids)
> > aren't....
> 
> Thanks for pointing out my flawed logic.  I wasn't quite sure what was
> MIME and what wasn't.  How about the attached patch, instead?

I agree that things are better.  But, ironically, this patch is a case
in point.  It's attached as text/x-patch and makes replying to and
commenting on patch inline more laborious.  Perhaps it should be clear,
text/plain tends to work (and is better than inline whitespace damaged
patches).  Andrew's "The Perfect Patch" has some text you could lift.

http://www.zip.com.au/~akpm/linux/patches/stuff/tpp.txt

thanks,
-chris
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/