Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:
> On 11/19/2016 10:11 AM, Stephen Frost wrote:
>> That's actually not the case if we use a hash, because the client could
>> figure out what the hash is before sending it.
> The fact that it could possibly be done is not a good reason for doing
> it.
Quite. I will *not* go along with any proposal that requires me to
duplicate some hashing logic being done elsewhere. Way too much risk
of error there.
> Every proposal along these lines strikes me as making more unobvious
> hoops for people to jump through. We're just reinventing the wheel here
> because we don't like the color of the standard wheels that some email
> MUAs produce.
Yeah, anything like this would be going very very far out of our way to
keep these lines in commit messages under an arbitrary limit (which we're
already exceeding anyway in many cases). I'm inclined to think we should
just straight up decide that having the message link be a clickable URL is
worth the longer lines, or that it is not. Personally I vote for "not",
but I recognize that I might be in the minority.
BTW, before we give up completely on reconciling the two objectives,
is anyone aware of a line-continuation convention that would be likely
to work? If we could do something like
Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/\
CAF4Au4w6rrH_j1bvVhzpOsRiHCog7sGJ3LSX0tY8ZdwhHT88LQ@mail.gmail.com
it would improve matters all around.
regards, tom lane
