markus schnalke wrote:
[2010-12-14 12:29] Oliver Kiddle <okiddle(_at_)yahoo(_dot_)co(_dot_)uk>
Any objections if I apply those? Doesn't git have some ways to preserve
details of the actual author of a patch? Or better still, could someone
give Meillo permissions on the git repository.
I don't need permissions now as I will be offline from Friday on (will
write a mail related to that soon), also I think I don't want
permissions currently. I feel better if you apply patches I propose.
But I do miss my name on stuff I had been involved in. This surely
affects anyone who contributes in any way. Adding names to commit
messages or the changelog is sufficient IMO.
I think we should just use the usual git commit message conventions
here, which support having the author of a change and its committer
be different people. There's also the "Signed-off-by: foo" set of
conventions.
So if people without commit access submit patches to this list
using git-format-patch/git-send-email then people with commit
access can easily apply them with git am, and the author
attribution is preserved.
On the future of the ChangeLog -- I agree that with a git commit
log there's no point in manually updating it. We should probably
consider having an automated update from the git log for releases
when we roll tarballs.
-- PMM
_______________________________________________
Nmh-workers mailing list
Nmh-workers(_at_)nongnu(_dot_)org
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers