+1 (Hi everyone!)
When it comes time to selecting someone as a committer, I'm sure it'd much easier if their contributions were easily locatable vs. masked by the various people who happened to commit them. Also, credit where credit is due. On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 12:58 AM, Mark Grover <[email protected]> wrote: > +1 > We use the same in Apache Bigtop and I really like it as well. We request > contributors to create the patch by 'git format-patch' which the committer > can then 'sign-off and commit'. FYI, Bigtop's instructions are listed here > < > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/BIGTOP/How+to+Contribute#HowtoContribute-Howtogeneratepatches > > > . > > On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 9:19 PM, Sean Busbey <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Hi folks! > > > > Now that we're going to start getting patches into our own repository, > > I'd like to discuss how we attribute authorship of patches from > > non-committers. Personally, I've really liked the way things work for > > git in the HBase community. > > > > The commit author is set to the contributor (which is a different > > piece of commit metadata than the one doing the committing). Then the > > committer uses the git "signed-off-by" to include their name in the > > commit message. > > > > I really like this because as a community maintainer I can easily > > parse the git history for information about contributions. (and check > > it against similar data in jira) > > > > What do other folks think? > > > > -- > > Sean > > >
