Re: [PATCH v1 2/2] Documentation: process: Recommend to put Cc: tags after cutter '---' line

[Jani Nikula]

On Tue, 23 Apr 2024, Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 23, 2024 at 07:37:34PM +0300, Jani Nikula wrote:
>> On Tue, 23 Apr 2024, Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > On Tue, Apr 23, 2024 at 05:30:49PM +0300, Jani Nikula wrote:
>> >> The Cc's on the mailing list archive are harder to dig up, and do not
>> >> accurately reflect the same information.
>> >
>> > How comes? These Cc: are 1:1 mapped to the Cc: email headers.
>> 
>> Patch Cc's get mapped to email Cc's depending on personal git sendemail
>> configuration.
>> 
>> People can add more Cc's in the emails when sending.
>
> So, which exactly a proof why email headers are better for that, as they
> reflect _reality_.

No, I think the point is, commit message Cc != email message Cc, they
just have the same name.

Similar to, say, Reviewed-by, a commit message Cc may turn into an email
message Cc. But you can't make assumptions about it one way or the
other.

Imagine the commit message Cc was named "Attn:" and handled
appropriately. That probably reflects a lot of commit message Cc usage.

BR,
Jani.


>
>> Mailing list Cc's actually present in the archives depend on mailing
>> list manager configuration, and, in some cases, even the personal list
>> preferences of individual subscribers.

-- 
Jani Nikula, Intel