Email subject line formatting

[mark.reinhold at oracle.com]

2020/5/4 6:12:32 -0700, robin.westberg at oracle.com:
> ...
> 
> So in summary, these are the changes that I think we agree on:
> 
> - Normally, pull request emails are prefixed with “RFR:”
> - Comments made in the pull request are prefixed “Re: RFR:"
> - If the pull request is already integrated when the mail is
>   generated, the prefix of the initial mail is “Integrated:” (changed
>   from “Re: [Integrated] RFR:”)

Do you mean, changed from “FYI: ...”?

> - When integration happens, a reply to the original RFR mail is sent
>   with the prefix “Integrated:"
> - Further comments on an already integrated pull request are prefixed
>   “Re: Integrated:”

This all sounds fine.

Side question: Is there a reason for using the term “integrated” rather
than “merged?”

> There are a few more subject rewriting actions that happen as well:
> 
> If a pull request is closed without being integrated (a.k.a
> withdrawn), the prefix currently is "Re: [Closed] RFR:” - perhaps
> change this to “Closed:”?

I agree with Magnus that “withdrawn” would be a better term here, but
perhaps “closed” is preferable if that’s the term that Git/GitHub use
for this action.

> An incremental update to a pull request creates a direct reply to the
> initial RFR mail, with the prefix “Re: [Rev 02] RFR:”. Further
> comments to the new changes are then threaded as replies to this
> mail. This makes it easy to see which revision a comment refers to. An
> option here that may look more similar to the new subjects would be
> “RFR: v2:” or similar. Thoughts?

I agree with Magnus that a “[v2]” suffix would be preferable.

> Also, the changes will only affect the subjects of the generated
> emails - the threading headers will remain the same. Or are there any
> additional concerns or thoughts about how to arrange them to improve
> readability in thread-capable MUAs (such as the web archive)? I guess
> that could also be improved later.

If by “threading headers” you mean the "In-Reply-To" and "References"
headers, then I don’t see why those would need to change.

- Mark