From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andy Whitcroft Subject: Re: git push mirror mode Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2007 13:44:32 +0000 Message-ID: <20071108134432.GK9736@shadowen.org> References: <20071108121136.GG9736@shadowen.org> <20071108124435.GH9736@shadowen.org> <47330BA4.6030101@op5.se> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Johannes Schindelin , git@vger.kernel.org, Junio C Hamano To: Andreas Ericsson X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Nov 08 14:45:20 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1Iq7gf-0000PX-6e for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Thu, 08 Nov 2007 14:44:49 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757191AbXKHNoa (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Nov 2007 08:44:30 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1756693AbXKHNo3 (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Nov 2007 08:44:29 -0500 Received: from hellhawk.shadowen.org ([80.68.90.175]:2962 "EHLO hellhawk.shadowen.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756185AbXKHNo3 (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Nov 2007 08:44:29 -0500 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=pinky) by hellhawk.shadowen.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1Iq7gG-0003CC-PH; Thu, 08 Nov 2007 13:44:25 +0000 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <47330BA4.6030101@op5.se> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) Received-SPF: pass X-SPF-Guess: pass Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Thu, Nov 08, 2007 at 02:14:12PM +0100, Andreas Ericsson wrote: > Barring any errors in my understanding of the matter, here's how it > works for git. > > git separates author from committer, so code attribution is done with > author, and "I verified this is sane" is done by committer. Those two > usually only ever differ when the user tells git commit that the author > was someone else than him/her self, or when rewriting history with git > rebase or similar. git am also maintains authorship (using the From: > line in emails), but sets $committer to the person running it, so when > you apply patches sent by email from someone else you get the code > attribution right by default. > > The Signed-off-by line is, in git, used as "I touched the code here and > agree that it may be included in the mothership repo and all future > releases" (the spirit of that sentence is also in > Documentation/SubmittingPatches). > > We also have Acked-by (as does the kernel, no? I think we inherited it > from there) to mean something along the lines of "I vote we include this", > but not always based on technical merit (ie, patches can have many acks > without having ever been tested). > > Suggested-by, Tested-by and Reported-by are used less often, not always > written in dash-form, but hopefully always self-explanatory ;-) What that doesn't tell me is how when sending an email carrying a patch one ensures the attribution is correct when loaded into git. Having messed about with it a bit it does seem that if one wants git to attribute the patch to junio I have to add a From: line to the top of the email payload. I'll resend so attributed. -apw