Re: [PATCH] rebase -i: fixup fixup! fixup!

Excerpts from Junio C Hamano's message of Tue Jun 25 14:33:18 -0700 2013:

Andrew Pimlott [off-list ref] writes:

Just reponding for the "procedual" part for now.

quoted

So if I don't want to break the discussion, should I append the unedited
format-patch output to my message after "scissors", or should I send it
as a whole new message with --in-reply-to?  Or something else?  I'll try
the first.

Which is fine, and you are almost there, but you do not want

 (1) "From 99023b..." that is not part of the message (it is a
     delimiter between multiple patches when/in case a file contains
     more than one);

 (2) "From: Andrew..." that is the same as the e-mail header in the
     message I am responding to;

 (3) "Date: ..." which is older than the e-mail header in the
     message I am responding to---the latter is the date people
     actually saw this patch on the mailing list, so it is
     preferrable to use it than the timestamp in your repository.

So in this case, I'd expect to see, after the "-- >8 --" line, only
"Subject: " line, a blank and the log message.

Thank you.  It was not clear to me even after several doc readings what
git-mailinfo would look for where.  I think I assumed that the idea was
to transmit the original commit perfectly, and I stubbornly failed to
give up that assumption even when it clearly didn't fit.  Everything
makes more sense with the understanding that the receiver will pull
together non-patch metadata in the way that makes sense from his point
of view (and that a different commit will come back via fetch).  I will
take a whack at clarifying the docs if I have time.

Andrew