From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.4 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_MED,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 02AE3CA9EB5 for ; Mon, 4 Nov 2019 13:23:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C2E0621D7D for ; Mon, 4 Nov 2019 13:23:47 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.com header.i=@google.com header.b="lnJRLYoB" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728781AbfKDNXr (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Nov 2019 08:23:47 -0500 Received: from mail-qt1-f195.google.com ([209.85.160.195]:40152 "EHLO mail-qt1-f195.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727332AbfKDNXr (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Nov 2019 08:23:47 -0500 Received: by mail-qt1-f195.google.com with SMTP id o49so23819063qta.7 for ; Mon, 04 Nov 2019 05:23:46 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=+Hf82UhKLGuROjcA0fmh91Iuys2bzdzmPWjxl0CdWdY=; b=lnJRLYoBdnod9vSR/1xtMZD7We32j+GWkrKsH28RKPaCtSzBRfhiiI2VTPdjh3Y/YV WnzGktDzQr08HOd36kz4DzYvGLsMpskHnqz1gKpEeGs8L7x2gk/6DTuAUpywZuE63uxp qY7q1g4FTpEG8kuQN98IGfHbnQJeaIMOVG7Is0xDzKun3SsscZ+uf5T5bFXgEqK38ICg 6OxsmFrX3yiUreNeCMiDbtVYsvZi9PxHoloDol6UzhSCH18BrKf8L3AQ1lewJoo0HoMS vQID4HlosLLKNkoucWiMl1AQ37nqcDT+rXgl/4uFb04IRDza+jlcMsBvAVEdaCywZWb8 bm7g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=+Hf82UhKLGuROjcA0fmh91Iuys2bzdzmPWjxl0CdWdY=; b=Jo8QqMue/ItdaVeS2MS2EQMIXm6XOrvg8LhQKUvny+xUw94OOKW6eSRzufODCL0m/B y+sHQHq9js1TxH3NsxIAYzDIOpft6vxuNHkcmvE5+kpD0o1Dz4bVcXo+o4LWYL3cvrxj VN6TdD+qb17V1Wz3shrw+OrYpu8hxnLsc70ZnGC7xzD+9O6cTJo6GYYoMe9QZvc1ojGJ mz3DM0yaB7BRLhRzQRxaB7jbCuDZz7f47QR0s52f3d/zr/3smwwn3+j11ByxHpSVqOH5 6tZekPe8WBC89r1D3Kvg6IYxOgMDmlv9walp3a/8GvphQwg8cc+ADfziR5VeAYMCGeLP a+NQ== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUrdmABzY5CLMI4IU74aHm2WOknq+HwufB2kRaqaL3Hadvmcxem K/uFR5RNVzf7W3GrhMHZOzNlLYwFqoKYMMvyoe0zEw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyLLpLPptwc/3S4CQiu+1i1bse7bXQQK2ZUxD9FGGNOTtaPo0HQQs5Jl8RivnKaCthWOFutskmSDNm4aVKot+M= X-Received: by 2002:aed:24af:: with SMTP id t44mr11853767qtc.57.1572873825759; Mon, 04 Nov 2019 05:23:45 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20191101022746.GA25491@dcvr> <20191101090456.GD2671695@kroah.com> <20191104131310.GE28764@mit.edu> In-Reply-To: <20191104131310.GE28764@mit.edu> From: Dmitry Vyukov Date: Mon, 4 Nov 2019 14:23:33 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: patch attachments still unwelcome? To: "Theodore Y. Ts'o" Cc: Greg KH , Eric Wong , workflows@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: workflows-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: workflows@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Nov 4, 2019 at 2:13 PM Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 01, 2019 at 10:04:56AM +0100, Greg KH wrote: > > > So the documentation in the kernel advising against sending > > > patch attachments seems hypocritical. Changing the kernel docs > > > allow patch attachments could be a good start to making life > > > easier for contributors without SMTP or IMAP access. > > > > It's not hypocritical, as lots of email clients still get this wrong and > > make responding to attachments almost impossible. Many do get it right, > > but trying to document the differences here is quite difficult (I tried > > once, gave up as it was a mess). > > > > > Are many MUAs still incapable of handling them? > > > mutt shows text patches inline, at least. > > > > For most MUAs that send them, yes, but not for all. I know of at least > > 2 that send text attachments in formats that mutt will not show it > > inline, nor allow responding to them properly. MacOS Mail is one easy > > example to point to as getting this totally wrong. > > > > So, if you know what you are doing, yes, this is fine, but it's still a > > good idea to say "please do not do this" to make it easier for people > > just starting out. > > Perhaps we should explicitly explain this and then include a white > list of MUA's that can send text attachments safely/correctly? (e.g., > if you are using the following MUA's, using text attachments are OK; > if you are using the following MUA's, it will definitely NOT work; > with all others, proceed with caution.) One thing that wasn't clear to me when I implemented syzbot is that some people see attachments inline. syzbot included whole kernel config and 1MB of logs as attachments, I assumed that other people see them as, well, attachments. So that may be worth documenting as well. Though, I did not know that document exists as well, so it would not help me...