On Wed, 2011-03-16 at 13:50 -0300, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: > Em 16-03-2011 11:03, Guilherme Salgado escreveu: > > Hi there, > > > > I see that some emails with patches have a From: field in the body[1], > > and I'm wondering if there's any reason for not using that (when > > available, of course) as the patch submitter. Well, now that I think of > > it, one could argue that the submitter is whoever sent the email, but > > maybe it would be useful to have a 'author' field on Patch so that we > > can properly represent cases where submitter != author? > > When I apply patches, I prefer to have both information, as it is > currently provided. The scripts I use to apply patches detect when a > patch has more than one "From" and allow me to solve (in a matter of fact, > my scripts _force_ me to solve the dual "From" conflict). > > It seems risky to me to let patchwork to automatically change the patch > submitter, especially since, sometimes, patch description could have a > "From:" that may not be the patch author. > > For example, I've seem a few patches that have email references. It would > not be impossible to see a "From: " or "Author: " in the middle of such > references.
That's a good point, but I think we could avoid that if we were conservative and just used a 'From:' when it's at the beginning of a line and that line is before the beginning of the diff. However, I kind of think it'd be better to store that information in a separate field, and if we do that it wouldn't be that big a deal if patchwork gets it wrong as it's not overwriting anything. -- Guilherme Salgado <https://launchpad.net/~salgado>
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Patchwork mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/patchwork
