From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCH] Implement git-quiltimport Date: Tue, 16 May 2006 22:31:04 -0700 Message-ID: <7v1wut2p5z.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> References: <7vbqtxaj5k.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed May 17 07:31:15 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FgEco-0006DD-FL for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Wed, 17 May 2006 07:31:10 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932130AbWEQFbH (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 May 2006 01:31:07 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932141AbWEQFbH (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 May 2006 01:31:07 -0400 Received: from fed1rmmtao03.cox.net ([68.230.241.36]:20692 "EHLO fed1rmmtao03.cox.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932130AbWEQFbG (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 May 2006 01:31:06 -0400 Received: from assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net ([68.4.9.127]) by fed1rmmtao03.cox.net (InterMail vM.6.01.06.01 201-2131-130-101-20060113) with ESMTP id <20060517053105.YJSO19317.fed1rmmtao03.cox.net@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>; Wed, 17 May 2006 01:31:05 -0400 To: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) In-Reply-To: (Eric W. Biederman's message of "Tue, 16 May 2006 23:17:23 -0600") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110004 (No Gnus v0.4) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) writes: > A infrastructure question came to me when looking at this: > several of the patches are from a branch with several authors. > How do we specify a commit in git with several authors? > > There are cases when you have enough collaboration that even > a single patch could have multiple authors, contributing equally. The object format allows one author and one committer, but they are only used for human consumption and log summarizing purposes by the core. We could extend it to support more than one but I doubt it is worth it. I would say it would be best to place the primary contact person, incase somebody has a problem with that particular patch done by such a group, on the author line. Listing everybody involved to give credits to them at the end of the log message would also be a good idea, and that's where we usually record attribution, sign-offs and acked-bys.