From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: git-commit: allow From: line to be entered in commit message Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 11:51:17 -0800 Message-ID: <7vy81j6h56.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> References: <7vzmm1mcfz.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <7v4q48hizr.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <7vzmm0eod1.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <40b2b7d90601130311v78db741dx7c5eaa57ad300850@mail.gmail.com> <7v64oo9gc7.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 Fri Jan 13 20:53:37 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 1ExUzM-0003Ls-5v for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Fri, 13 Jan 2006 20:53:32 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1422916AbWAMTvh (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Jan 2006 14:51:37 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1422907AbWAMTvf (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Jan 2006 14:51:35 -0500 Received: from fed1rmmtao01.cox.net ([68.230.241.38]:39859 "EHLO fed1rmmtao01.cox.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1422909AbWAMTvT (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Jan 2006 14:51:19 -0500 Received: from assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net ([68.4.9.127]) by fed1rmmtao01.cox.net (InterMail vM.6.01.05.02 201-2131-123-102-20050715) with ESMTP id <20060113195023.EFYB15695.fed1rmmtao01.cox.net@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>; Fri, 13 Jan 2006 14:50:23 -0500 To: sean 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: sean writes: > So do you still agree with that, would you accept a patch? Or do you have > some fundamental reason to think that environment variables are a better > way to pass information in this case? Fundamental reason of not doing anything is (1) not to make unnecessary changes and (1) to avoidi decisions ;-). No objections to --from='John Doe ' by itself, other than "You could say GIT_AUTHOR_* before the command instead of --from after the command; as long as it is not done regularly as an interactive command, the difference does not matter". At that point, "making no unneeded changes" kicks in. While I do understand that it might be necessary to commit somebody else's patch occasionally, you have not convinced me that is not such a rare thing, so until then the change stays at lower priority. After I am convinced that it is not so rare and having an easier and more consistent way (something coming from environment and other things from command line is inconsistent) would generally be a good addition, I further need to think about these issues before taking such a patch, in the context of the "git commit" command as a whole: - Is --from the right word? Shouldn't it be --author? - Do we want author date? If not, why not? - What about committer information? If not, why not?