+1
BTW, Should we also ignore mentioning the contributors and reviewers in the
corresponding JIRA? And then directly just closed the JIRA?
-Butao
On 2025/04/08 16:22:33 Ayush Saxena wrote:
> I feel that for some folks—especially those new to the project—seeing
> their name in the commit message might serve as a small motivation to
> review more. The practice of including the author name I believe has
> been around since the SVN days or the patch days, or even earlier,
> when committers used to apply patches manually. Back then, unless the
> committer explicitly added the author, the commit would default to the
> committer’s name, and figuring out the actual author email from JIRA
> wasn’t always straightforward.
>
> If the consensus is to not include reviewer names in commit messages,
> that’s totally fine with me—it’s one less thing to worry about.
> Personally, I don’t have a strong opinion here. Even if my name
> doesn’t appear as the author or reviewer for a change I was involved
> in, it doesn't really matter to me anymore. I think many folks who’ve
> been in the ecosystem for a while probably feel the same.
>
> That said, I can’t really recall if seeing my name early on gave me a
> sense of validation—but maybe it did. And if it helps newer
> contributors, especially those who aren’t yet recognized committers,
> feel a bit more involved or valued, then I’m okay putting in that
> extra bit of effort if it makes someone’s day.
>
> That said, tracking down real names from GitHub handles can sometimes
> be a bit of a pain and a time sink for committers. So, if the group
> prefers to skip reviewer names, I’m perfectly fine with that too. Most
> of the projects I know don't do that or ever did it. Just to
> reiterate—it doesn’t matter much to me personally, but I’m happy to go
> with whatever the group finds more useful, especially the non
> committers.
>
> As for the author field—GitHub already shows the author name, so it
> does feel a bit redundant to include it explicitly, so dropping that
> is totally f9
>
> +1
>
> -Ayush
>
> On Tue, 8 Apr 2025 at 21:15, Shohei Okumiya <oku...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > +1 for the author part.
> >
> > Regarding the reviewers' names, I have one thouht from a bit diffrent
> > angle. The number of reviewers is always the biggest bottleneck. If the
> > small praize motivates people and they try one more review, it is
> > meaningful. But I don't have any evidence about how many people feel so.
> > So, I'm not stick with it. By the way, I am fairly happy to see my name in
> > the commit history.
> >
> > In short, I agree to remove the author's name. I can still add reviewers'
> > GitHub user names(identifying real names is often tough) if we believe it
> > could motivate a meaningful number of people.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Okumin
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 8, 2025 at 23:35 Zsolt Miskolczi <zsolt.miskol...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> +1.
> >>
> >> I don't see the value in that.
> >>
> >> Attila Turoczy <aturo...@cloudera.com.invalid> ezt írta (időpont: 2025.
> >> ápr. 8., K, 16:32):
> >>>
> >>> +1.It's a thoughtful gesture for reviewers, but if it creates headaches
> >>> for the dev's and adds unnecessary steps, I think we can live without it.
> >>>
> >>> -Attila
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, Apr 8, 2025 at 4:27 PM Stamatis Zampetakis <zabe...@gmail.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Hi all,
> >>>>
> >>>> How do you feel about dropping the contributor and reviewer names from
> >>>> the commit summary?
> >>>>
> >>>> Before:
> >>>> HIVE-28884: Decouple source.q test from SRC dataset (Stamatis
> >>>> Zampetakis reviewed by Soumyakanti Das, Zsolt Miskolczi, Shohei
> >>>> Okumiya, Simhadri Govindappa)
> >>>>
> >>>> After:
> >>>> HIVE-28884: Decouple source.q test from SRC dataset
> >>>>
> >>>> The main goal is to increase developers productivity and reduce
> >>>> boilerplate information.
> >>>>
> >>>> In many cases the extra information is longer than the commit summary
> >>>> itself. Every time I merge a PR I have to spend 2-3 minutes editing
> >>>> the commit message and figuring out the names of every person that is
> >>>> involved in the PR.
> >>>>
> >>>> Moreover, the "Author" information is already present in the commit
> >>>> metadata and the reviewers are clearly shown and tracked under the
> >>>> respective PR in GitHub so removing them from the commit summary does
> >>>> not result in loss of information.
> >>>>
> >>>> The PR id is always present in the commit message (either in the
> >>>> summary or in the body) so we can easily fetch all the necessary
> >>>> information (even more and more structured) about contributors and
> >>>> reviewers of certain PR via the GitHub UI or programmatically via REST
> >>>> or GraphQL.
> >>>>
> >>>> For instance the following GitHub GraphQL query can be used to obtain
> >>>> the name of the author of the PR and the names of the reviewers that
> >>>> approved the PR.
> >>>>
> >>>> {
> >>>> repository(owner: "apache", name: "hive") {
> >>>> pullRequest(number: 5750) {
> >>>> title
> >>>> author {
> >>>> ... on User {
> >>>> name
> >>>> }
> >>>> }
> >>>> reviews(first: 100, states: APPROVED) {
> >>>> nodes {
> >>>> author {
> >>>> ... on User {
> >>>> name
> >>>> }
> >>>> }
> >>>> }
> >>>> }
> >>>> }
> >>>> }
> >>>> }
> >>>>
> >>>> Best,
> >>>> Stamatis
>
