From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM, RP_MATCHES_RCVD,T_DKIM_INVALID shortcircuit=no autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F4FB201A9 for ; Mon, 20 Feb 2017 20:06:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752513AbdBTUG1 (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 Feb 2017 15:06:27 -0500 Received: from mail-pg0-f67.google.com ([74.125.83.67]:34311 "EHLO mail-pg0-f67.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752505AbdBTUGY (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 Feb 2017 15:06:24 -0500 Received: by mail-pg0-f67.google.com with SMTP id s67so3701229pgb.1 for ; Mon, 20 Feb 2017 12:06:24 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id :user-agent:mime-version; bh=LDLqstsAUDtrpWoGioGMW5SYxjD2DSmodv6feNrSjo0=; b=QMPsn+/1qG7STWPLDNhDD+ZhTFHVEcnQ0dEcbCKwyiwSnoXtnU5c/OEfjeXQT+3/lu sCRLQoubcvnypH5dspkjbKp0h0+FjSaWlmxOWSVkpdq47vGZDJWIDfZiIuHonHeaolWa BDJm103JUW/exP5M29cJGQcJeleDX8V121eEGTiAO5bkfNOOHQURQ55cCm8Z5MNvXmR6 yqAh1sxlmImMePSlz98KQHuAMFmgT7DGHKqYzvuOmNLqGkyTs1DVy+sQ0A0q5X7d9eiV yWviwRYSc7+DW69feVnzTdOGg1+qcxnJ11IHcP8t4PdvuiZlblYuNYRRR4JwPQVANTI0 7jnQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date :in-reply-to:message-id:user-agent:mime-version; bh=LDLqstsAUDtrpWoGioGMW5SYxjD2DSmodv6feNrSjo0=; b=P5lqyrjRS6LtLtmo2WMLjbhHH/qWr/mNgza/RLCwdT9rzOIEbhmBAON2WevKSYiW5O mmqVwcuh+4qMuqaqrOs3LARKzIHWp760fExyJ/qeTGFlxD4RQEfZw7NVQpcnl3kJjSwu 9UNWgu6w8ZejrEMEVeChCJhTv1ZRojilKgvsOl6GYdyMrtqEFmk8XDCfMkJH1GjMaJ+J mgOp2hdQOtWvGd2M1wH1+Azb0QZkdfI6noM4FUQZRiTjhG3H2BeDtmFPz9yha6NCGVha xGLAB07PxzIWgTo+8qvHf/1yJeTjy108kq2/zx3kv+8m4RpuKSFGzgq+IV6FTbY+bs7N vYKg== X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39nrrWgY3fpb/3HTEKD1L8HvyKYIw8gN8J9zmN4luHTEVqyIZtX1m+CfN75ksa0H9A== X-Received: by 10.84.195.164 with SMTP id j33mr34223599pld.171.1487621183778; Mon, 20 Feb 2017 12:06:23 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost ([2620:0:1000:8622:71d2:895f:c7:4f5e]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id d63sm36624327pfg.65.2017.02.20.12.06.21 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 20 Feb 2017 12:06:21 -0800 (PST) From: Junio C Hamano To: Johannes Schindelin Cc: Josh Triplett , git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Cross-referencing the Git mailing list archive with their corresponding commits in `pu` References: Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2017 12:06:20 -0800 In-Reply-To: (Junio C. Hamano's message of "Mon, 20 Feb 2017 11:33:24 -0800") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.1.91 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Junio C Hamano writes: > Johannes Schindelin writes: > >> There is a third category, and this one *does* come as a surprise to me. >> It appears that at least *some* patches' Date: lines are either ignored or >> overridden or changed on their way from the mailing list into Git's commit >> history. There was only one commit in that commit range: >> >> 3c0cb0c (read_loose_refs(): read refs using resolve_ref_recursively(), >> Michael Haggerty 2017-02-09) >> >> This one was committed with an author date "Thu, 09 Feb 2017 21:53:52 >> +0100" but it appears that there was no mail sent to the Git mailing list > > I think this is this one: > > > > Recent "What's cooking" lists the topic this one is part with this > comment: > > The tip one is newer than the one posted to the list but was sent > privately by the author via his GitHub repository. We didn't have any pull from sub-maintainers during the period you checked, but when we do, those could also fall into the category. Even though I see some l10n patches Cc'ed to the list, I won't be surprised if not everything that is sent to Jiang Xin (i18n/l10n coordinator) is, for example. It also is OK for sub-maintainers to have their own commit to describe or otherwise improve their area and without sending a patch before doing so if they deem it appropriate [*1*]. I actually think automation like yours would help another category: There is a newer version of the series or an entirely new series on the list, but the project's tree has not picked them up (yet). I from time to time sweep my inbox in an attempt to find and pick up leftover bits. Sometimes the authors remind me by pinging [*2*], which greatly helps. But another set of eyeballs that may be enhanced with a mechanised filter that catches "messages without corresponding commits", which is the opposite of this "third" category, would be of great help, too [*3*]. [Footnote] *1* ... like trivial fixes, for example, at their discretion. After all we entrusted their own area and we should give them the flexibility they can exercise with good taste ;-). *2* e.g. <2f67fc21-92f9-a03e-1b09-a237af6dbc46@alum.mit.edu> *3* ... even if a mechanised filter alone might strike too many false positives.