From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: Git Rebase blows away GIT_AUTHOR_NAME Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2011 15:07:06 -0500 Message-ID: <20110114200705.GA3316@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <20110114162144.GA867@sigill.intra.peff.net> <7vhbdbnxud.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: Erik Faye-Lund , Linus Torvalds , Tor Arntsen , JT Olds , git@vger.kernel.org To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Jan 14 21:07:23 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Pdpvd-0001d4-TH for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Fri, 14 Jan 2011 21:07:22 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751961Ab1ANUHK (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Jan 2011 15:07:10 -0500 Received: from xen6.gtisc.gatech.edu ([143.215.130.70]:55586 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751922Ab1ANUHJ (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Jan 2011 15:07:09 -0500 Received: (qmail 6898 invoked by uid 111); 14 Jan 2011 20:07:07 -0000 Received: from 99-108-226-0.lightspeed.iplsin.sbcglobal.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (99.108.226.0) (smtp-auth username relayok, mechanism cram-md5) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.40) with ESMTPA; Fri, 14 Jan 2011 20:07:07 +0000 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Fri, 14 Jan 2011 15:07:06 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <7vhbdbnxud.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 10:28:58AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Jeff King writes: > > > So we should probably do one or both of: > > > > 1. Make an --allow-any-name option to mailinfo, and use it when we > > invoke mailinfo internally for rebasing. That still doesn't solve > > the emailed patch problem, but at least keeps purely internal > > operations sane. > > > > 2. Bump the check up to git-commit time, which is the best place to > > catch and tell somebody that their name is too short, because they > > can actually fix it. > > > > Even if we dropped the check now, option (2) is still useful, because > > you have no idea which version of git the other end will use to apply > > your patch. > > I am perfectly Ok with making the check looser in "am" when $rebasing is > in effect. Wouldn't that solve the issue? More or less. You would still have some lossiness when emailing your patch. Do we want to warn about that? -Peff