On Sun, 10 May 2020 at 10:05, Matthias Bläsing <[email protected]> wrote: > From my POV yes - else I would have not written the mail. Yes it is > more work, so what? Testing, Evaluating is still more.
Testing, evaluating, etc. is also spread out amongst more people, particularly during freeze. I'm all for not adding extra overhead if we don't really need to - it's small but everything adds up. > Maybe they are not interested in authorship or are only let people > create PRs, that are committers themselfs. And maybe we don't assume and actually look into it and not act differently just for the sake of it?! Learning "best practice", or more to the point, "what works", from other ASF projects is good IMO. > > the commit is not the only (or canonical) record of > > this - there is the pull request and associated email trail that is > > archived by ASF for this reason. > > Sorry but this stupid. Git can hold the correct metadata: It's not stupid(!), a commit message by itself cannot capture intent to contribute - this is covered a little in https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-156 > This discussion is intended only to cover the broken squash-and-merge > behaviour of github. I know. It's far from ideal. The question for me is can we live with it or not? Best wishes, Neil --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] For further information about the NetBeans mailing lists, visit: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Mailing+lists
