On Jun 24, 2011, at 2:28 PM, Christopher Browne wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 6:47 PM, Greg Smith <g...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>> On 06/24/2011 01:42 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
>>> I am not inclined to try to track sponsors in the commit message at
>>> all.
>>
>> I was not suggesting that information be part of the commit. We've worked
>> out a reasonable initial process for the people working on sponsored
>> features to record that information completely outside of the commit or
>> release notes data. It turns out though that process would be easier to
>> drive if it were easier to derive a feature->{commit,author} list
>> though--and that would spit out for free with the rest of this. Improving
>> the ability to do sponsor tracking is more of a helpful side-effect of
>> something that's useful for other reasons rather than a direct goal.
>
> In taking a peek at the documentation and comments out on the interweb
> about "git amend," I don't think that it's going to be particularly
> successful if we try to capture all this stuff in the commit message
> and metadata, because it's tough to guarantee that *all* this data
> would be correctly captured at commit time, and you can't revise it
> after the commit gets pushed upstream.
Perhaps `git notes` could be something used to annotate these:
http://www.kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-notes.html
Regards,
David
--
David Christensen
End Point Corporation
da...@endpoint.com
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
