From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: SF Markus Elfring Date: Tue, 07 Jul 2015 11:53:58 +0000 Subject: Re: Clarification for the use of additional fields in the message body Message-Id: <559BBDD6.7040808@users.sourceforge.net> List-Id: References: <530CD2C4.4050903@users.sourceforge.net> <530CF8FF.8080600@users.sourceforge.net> <530DD06F.4090703@users.sourceforge.net> <5317A59D.4@users.sourceforge.net> <558EB32E.6090003@users.sourceforge.net> <558EB4DE.3080406@users.sourceforge.net> <20150707023103.GA22043@kroah.com> <559B6FF8.9010704@users.sourceforge.net> <559B85CD.6040200@users.sourceforge.net> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Frans Klaver Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman , Chris Park , Dean Lee , Johnny Kim , Rachel Kim , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, devel@driverdev.osuosl.org, Julia Lawall , kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, LKML > I think that as far as these kernel mailing lists are concerned, > the date of the update suggestion is the date on which you submitted the patch, > rather than the date you originally committed it to your local tree. I imagine that there are committers who would like to keep corresponding software development history a bit more accurate. > If you wish to keep track of this evolution for yourself, or > wish to share it, you're better off stashing it somewhere in a > (public) git repo that you control. Would it be nicer to preserve such data directly also by the usual mail interface? > If you insist on placing the date somewhere, you can also put the date > there if you wish. It'll be ignored by git when applied. This content management tool provides the capability to store the discussed information by the parameters "--author=" and "--date=", doesn't it? Is the environment variable "GIT_AUTHOR_DATE" also interesting occasionally? How often do you take extra care for passing appropriate data there? Regards, Markus