On Mar 20, 9:05am, Frank Terbeck wrote:
} Subject: Submitting patches [was: Re: Updated _git completion (not attache
}
} Johan Sundstrom wrote:
} > On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 14:18, Frank Terbeck wrote:
} >> [Etc/zsh-development-guide]
} >
} > This document doesn't mention it yet, but I assume it's best to }
> submit patches in the message body rather than as attachments? } >
> (Unless, I suppose, they contain binary content.)
}
} I think this is true (simply because it makes commenting patches
} easier). But my answer on the matter is certainly not authoritative. I
} thought I had seen similar comments on the list before; but I couldn't
} find any in a quick search via
} <http://www.zsh.org/cgi-bin/mla/wilma/workers>.
There's a preference for patches in the message body, yes. This is
less important than it used to be because the archive software has
gotten better at inlining text parts.
One my own pet peeves is the wild inconsistency of mime-type labeling
of attached diffs depending on what email client is used to attach
them. text/x-diff, text/x-patch, application/octet-stream, etc. etc.
No, dammit, they're text/plain. Just say so.