On Wed, 13 Jun 2018 15:27:31 +0200, Andreas Grünbacher wrote: > All of that may be correct, but those headers apparently do break > email based patch reviewing on Thunderbird and Gmail now, and that's > not very likely to change. If we continue with our current practice, > we'll end up frustrating users. On top of that, i we make this an > optional feature, quilt users may think that using that option is a > good idea when they will actually break their recipients' workflows. > As Thomas Gleixner wrote in the other thread, most recipients will > already have a way to deal with messages from other sources that don't > include patch filenames, so let's just get rid of Content-Disposition > headers in quilt for good.
It always feels bad to me to work around an issue in one piece of software when the bug is clearly in another piece of software. I'm not sure why fixes on the correct side of the problem should be unlikely. The behavior is clearly broken and against the RFC, and there may be other sources than quilt triggering the bug. Thunderbird is open source, the problem is identified, it shouldn't be that hard to fix it. Gmail is a different story, of course, but I guess there are some developers maintaining it too. That being said... I agree that recipients of such e-mails most likely already have an alternative solution in place for non-quilt sources, so probably removing the Content-Disposition header is not going to cause too much trouble. So feel free to go ahead and remove it if you think this is the best thing to do. If some users complain about the change, I'll let you deal with them ;-) -- Jean Delvare SUSE L3 Support
