Em Quarta-feira 18. Novembro 2009, às 12.58.15, Jeff Mitchell escreveu: > Thiago Macieira wrote: > > Em Quarta-feira 18. Novembro 2009, às 07.31.50, Riccardo Iaconelli escreveu: > >> Mmh... but this is a problem also with SVN, no? > > > > No. In SVN, if you commit, you're the author. > > And in Git, if you merge someone else's code, you're the "author" too.
Well, no. $ git log --pretty=fuller --committer=David\ Faure -n1 | cat commit 3cb304990f81799e6811b699b6b6ad1c32ec1107 Author: David Faure <[email protected]> AuthorDate: Fri May 29 16:36:15 2009 +0200 Commit: David Faure <[email protected]> CommitDate: Fri May 29 16:36:15 2009 +0200 Fix compilation with -pedantic This is Qt. David has no push rights. Yet he's both author and committer. The question is: who introduced his commit to Qt? The repository is public. You have the SHA-1. The answer to my question then is left as an exercise for the reader. > Yes, their name and email address (which could be fake) show up in the > history -- but ultimately the developer making the merge is taking > responsibility for the code. Indeed. > This isn't any different than with SVN, where a developer commits a > patch and credits a name and email address, both of which may be > fakes/temporary. > > From a policy/accountability perspective I don't see how this is really > different from SVN. There's a big difference. When you commit someone's patch to SVN, *your* name appears in the svn log. When whoever pushed David's patch above, David's name appeared in the history. Who introduced David's commit? -- Thiago Macieira - thiago (AT) macieira.info - thiago (AT) kde.org Senior Product Manager - Nokia, Qt Development Frameworks 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
