Riccardo Iaconelli wrote: >Il Thursday 24 July 2008 02:35:03 Michael Pyne ha scritto: >> Then if we must track it, how do we do so? I would of course prefer >> that however it is done, it is as foolproof as possible. So I don't >> know if manually adding tags to the commit log (like >> AUTHOR:[EMAIL PROTECTED]) is the best, I think making it part of the >> command itself would be better (i.e. bzr commit-for --author blah). > >git commit -s?
What the command above does (which is what the kernel people use) is that you commit a patch by someone else: the authorship is retained, but you add a line to the message saying you sign off on it. For a two-person event, this is not necessary, since the name of the committer is also kept in the commit message. However, imagine that, like the kernel, patches flow upstream through the social network. When a third person uses the same command, the author name would be retained, but the committer's name would change. The second committer's (and any other committer who is not the last one) name would appear only in the message. For KDE I don't think this would work. We have a fairly flat social structure and most people can commit to the repositories. Therefore, since a patch would probably never need to be analysed by more than one person (besides the author), signing off and other tags would not be necessary. -- Thiago Macieira - thiago (AT) macieira.info - thiago (AT) kde.org PGP/GPG: 0x6EF45358; fingerprint: E067 918B B660 DBD1 105C 966C 33F5 F005 6EF4 5358
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Kde-scm-interest mailing list [email protected] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-scm-interest
