+1

I haven't worked this way before, but I like it!  It sounds like we still
maintain 2 important pieces of metadata: contributor and
signoff/committer.  I consider the latter important, because it helps me
identify which committers are really actively doing reviews right now, in
case I need to request a review directly.

--Chris Nauroth




On 9/22/15, 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
>

Reply via email to