Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: patch logs not rfc(2)822 compatible

[Jeremy Shaw]

At Sat, 29 May 2004 14:36:39 +0800,
Cameron Patrick wrote:
> 
> James Blackwell wrote:
> 
> | > It sounds like the bug is using a `strict RFC 822' parser to load
> | > patch-logs...
> | 
> | I'd disagree. If one of the intentions of patch logs is to be RFC 822
> | compliant, then it should be so, even under strict parsers.
> 
> RFC 822 also requires the presence of a From: field and To:/Cc:/Bcc:
> fields.  Patch logs don't contain these now and I don't see why they
> should in future.  Perhaps we shouldn't be claiming RFC 822 compliance
> at all?

Agreed!

A better claim would be to support RFC2822, the successor to
RFC822. Among other things, RFC2822 has the following two differences:

 (1) In dates, years are specified using 4 digits instead of 2.

 (2) No specifically required headers

The two issues with patch-log non-conformance that I see are:

(1) The Date field

(2) Terminating lines with lf instead of crlf.

However, it might be reasonable to argue that (2) is a 'network
transformation' which can be undone by the program before sending the
data to the parser. It certainly seems fairly standard to terminate
lines in rfc2822-style files with just lf in the debian world...

Jeremy Shaw.
--

This message contains information which may be confidential and privileged. 
Unless you are the 
addressee (or authorized to receive for the addressee), you may not use, copy 
or disclose to anyone 
the message or any information contained in the message. If you have received 
the message in error, 
please advise the sender and delete the message.  Thank you.