On Jun 17, 2012, at 22:05 , Paul Davis wrote: > On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 3:02 PM, Jan Lehnardt <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> On Jun 17, 2012, at 21:56 , Paul Davis wrote: >> >>> On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 2:44 PM, Jan Lehnardt <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> On Jun 17, 2012, at 21:29 , Paul Davis wrote: >>>> >>>>> I'm not sure I like this so much. Playing around with it, its a bit >>>>> prone to screw ups. >>>> >>>> I just don't want to maintain this file manually any more. It is >>>> error-prone and makes merging user-contributions a pain. I'm happy >>>> to have this implemented in any other way, but I think we should >>>> try to remove any mechanical steps from maintaining our source if >>>> we can. I hope you agree! :) >>>> >>> >>> Its an extra step but not one that I find to be particularly onerous. >>> Given that we're already working on codifying merge practices I don't >>> see why we don't just add a check box for "includes commit adding >>> yourself to the THANKS file if this is your first contribution" that >>> we look for. >> >> That's a fair point, but this has annoyed me forever. >> >>>>> It also breaks if AUTHORS.gz exists before you >>>>> pull in new commits. We could solve that by forcing it to build every >>>>> time but that's a bit of a hack for not much gain. >>>> >>>> Can you explain how it breaks if AUTHORS.gz exists before the merge? >>>> If you mean THANKS.gz, my idea was that this is only relevant on >>>> packaging time (make distcheck) where THANKS.gz by definition does >>>> not exist. >>>> >>> >>> I'm not sure its a good idea to have a file that is only built >>> correctly in special circumstances. >> >> I'm happy to add an rm -f $< to the target. >> >> >>>>> Its also got Benoit in there twice since he made commits with slightly >>>>> different author/committer names which also seems awkward. >>>> >>>> The subsequent .mailmap commit fixes the dupes. The push emails seem >>>> to be delayed atm, I reported this to danielsh on #asfinfra. >>>> >>> >>> I'm confused. You've removed one manually curated file only to add a >>> new one that just modifies the build of the first? Seems like a lot of >>> gymnastics. >> >> .mailmap solves more than just this. >> >> >>> In a perfect world I would be all in with you on this but >>> unfortunately a large number of people don't spend time checking their >>> user settings before pushing commits around. Instead of just adding >>> people to a file the first time they make a commit this means I have >>> to go and check that the THANKS file is generated properly and then >>> maybe update .mailmap if not and recheck that I got it correct. >> >> Fair enough, wanna revert? >> >> Cheers >> Jan >> -- >> >> > > Playing with it a bit to see if I can make it build correctly and also > just build the AUTHORS file. I'll leave it around for a bit but won't > promise that the first time I spend more than 30s screwing with > mailmap that I revert it.
Heh, that took me a while to get right :) Cheers Jan --
