From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Nikolai Weibull Subject: Re: What shall we do with the GECOS field again? Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2005 23:21:13 +0200 Message-ID: <20050919212113.GB8862@puritan.pnetwork> References: <20050919134838.GC2903@pasky.or.cz> <20050919163219.GA8862@puritan.pnetwork> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Sep 19 23:24:21 2005 Return-path: Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EHT58-0000UJ-Rt for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Mon, 19 Sep 2005 23:21:47 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932350AbVISVVQ (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Sep 2005 17:21:16 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932695AbVISVVP (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Sep 2005 17:21:15 -0400 Received: from mxfep01.bredband.com ([195.54.107.70]:39097 "EHLO mxfep01.bredband.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932350AbVISVVP (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Sep 2005 17:21:15 -0400 Received: from puritan.petwork ([213.112.43.228] [213.112.43.228]) by mxfep01.bredband.com with ESMTP id <20050919212113.JVBM12537.mxfep01.bredband.com@puritan.petwork> for ; Mon, 19 Sep 2005 23:21:13 +0200 Received: by puritan.petwork (Postfix, from userid 1000) id C47C7ADFEA; Mon, 19 Sep 2005 23:21:13 +0200 (CEST) To: git@vger.kernel.org Mail-Followup-To: git@vger.kernel.org Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20050919163219.GA8862@puritan.pnetwork> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.8i Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Nikolai Weibull wrote: > If we stop using GECOS, then can we please start using $EMAIL (or > perhaps use it regardless of whether we use GECOS or not)? A lot of > applications seem to look for $EMAIL and I think that it's universal > enough for git to use it as well. To me it seems that both > GIT_AUTHOR_NAME, GIT_AUTHOR_EMAIL, GIT_COMMITTER_NAME, and > GIT_COMMITTER_EMAIL can use it, as I set $EMAIL as > > EMAIL="Nikolai Weibull " > > Perhaps I should provide a patch instead of just putting out requests?, Perhaps something like the following patch will do?, nikolai --- diff --git a/ident.c b/ident.c --- a/ident.c +++ b/ident.c @@ -127,18 +127,22 @@ char *get_ident(const char *name, const char date[50]; int i; - if (!name) - name = real_name; - if (!email) - email = real_email; + if (!name && !email && getenv("EMAIL")) { + i = copy(buffer, sizeof(buffer), 0, getenv("EMAIL")); + i = add_raw(buffer, sizeof(buffer), i, " "); + } else { + if (!name) + name = real_name; + if (!email) + email = real_email; + i = copy(buffer, sizeof(buffer), 0, name); + i = add_raw(buffer, sizeof(buffer), i, " <"); + i = copy(buffer, sizeof(buffer), i, email); + i = add_raw(buffer, sizeof(buffer), i, "> "); + } strcpy(date, real_date); if (date_str) parse_date(date_str, date, sizeof(date)); - - i = copy(buffer, sizeof(buffer), 0, name); - i = add_raw(buffer, sizeof(buffer), i, " <"); - i = copy(buffer, sizeof(buffer), i, email); - i = add_raw(buffer, sizeof(buffer), i, "> "); i = copy(buffer, sizeof(buffer), i, date); if (i >= sizeof(buffer)) die("Impossibly long personal identifier"); -- Nikolai Weibull: now available free of charge at http://bitwi.se/! Born in Chicago, IL USA; currently residing in Gothenburg, Sweden. main(){printf(&linux["\021%six\012\0"],(linux)["have"]+"fun"-97);}