Tassilo Horn <[email protected]> writes: > David Kastrup <[email protected]> writes: > >>> (Oh, now I've just seen that git commit has an --author=... option to >>> specify the author explicitly. Sorry, I didn't know that, and now >>> the commit is already pushed, so too late to --amend.) >> >> If you coached the Patch submission and checked it, you might also (in >> addition to --author) use the -s option for "signing off" on the >> patch. > > Ok, good suggestion. > >> That leaves at least a tangible impression of who looked over the >> patch in case the question "who was ok with this ever being pushed in >> this state" arrives > > Can I read out of that statement that you are not satisfied with the > state of the patch?
No, I haven't looked at it at all. This was just explaining the procedure. Part of a system of Git is to make it feasible to trace histories and accountabilities. Once you use --author, you are pretty much _invisible_ to Git's record. Basically, you can push patches acting as a clerk (where the other person is not able to push for mostly technical reasons but considered reliable to act responsibly on his own) or as a warden. In the latter case, signing off will help you (and possibly others) remember that you have shared responsibility for the outcome. -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ auctex-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/auctex-devel
