On Tue, Aug 23, 2005 at 01:05:56PM +0200, Remko Troncon wrote: > Hi, > > A while ago, i asked for advice on how to log who committed a patch to a > repo, and ended up making a wrapper around darcs which writes this info > into a file.
> I was wondering, would it be a big change in Darcs to add this > 'committer' information to a patch, such as GIT apparently does ? I don't > know how it works in GIT, but i would think that the committer of a patch > is just\ the person doing the pull, the apply, or the record of a patch. > The only trouble i guess is getting the information on who is committing. In git the committer is an invarient, the person who first puts the change into git, so the darcs equivalent would be to add committer information on record only and thereafer to never modify this information. It's only really useful when the actual author of the patch isn't using git/darcs. > For record, pull, and apply, this could be by default the author of the > patch. For apply and pull, there could be an extra option to specify the > committer, which can e.g. be used by darcs push to pass the author of the > current repository ? We couldn't do what you want if the committer info were actually *part* of the patch ID, since then a patch's ID would be changing when pulling or applying, which would break darcs. Storing that information as extra metadata would be all right, just a bit tedious. One could store a whole history of information about each patch, which could be interesting. -- David Roundy http://www.darcs.net _______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://www.abridgegame.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
