[PATCH v2 3/7] Test for header preservation
stephen at that.guru
Tue Oct 11 02:31:34 AEDT 2016
On 2016-10-10 07:06, Johannes Berg wrote:
> On Wed, 2016-09-28 at 18:02 +0100, Stephen Finucane wrote:
>> On 28 Sep 15:22, Daniel Axtens wrote:
>> > We're about to rework header parsing. Try to ensure the changes
>> > preserve functionality.
>> > Signed-off-by: Daniel Axtens <dja at axtens.net>
>> I like the idea, but I don't know if there is any advantage in being
>> quite so specific?
> Forgive me for jumping in without understanding much of the context.
>> Couldn't we drop a lot of these headers? (for
>> example, the problematic 'CC' header)?
> We don't need the Cc header line in patchwork itself today, but Kalle
> is writing a tool that, among other things, will send out emails when
> patches are applied, and preserving the Cc line for that is really
> quite useful.
> But I may very well be misinterpreting this entirely.
You are :) This patch was simply a test to validate parsing of headers.
Daniel had used an existing mail and had hardcoded the expected parsed
version of the headers into the tests, resulting in a really long test.
The suggestion above was to validate against a simpler mail and make the
test shorter. This patch has been since dropped anyway so it's not an
issue in any case :)
More information about the Patchwork