This is the mail archive of the
gdb@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: ChangeLogs in commit messages
- From: Doug Evans <dje at google dot com>
- To: Joel Brobecker <brobecker at adacore dot com>
- Cc: Gary Benson <gbenson at redhat dot com>, Pedro Alves <palves at redhat dot com>, gdb <gdb at sourceware dot org>, Andreas Arnez <arnez at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com>
- Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2014 10:47:12 -0700
- Subject: Re: ChangeLogs in commit messages
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <20140814083231 dot GA6283 at blade dot nx> <20140814125224 dot GF4924 at adacore dot com> <54102ED8 dot 7060307 at redhat dot com> <CADPb22Q5cr2aFrZgF4LKXCgQDddSDBwUeA3UJ2V=D93SqETmGQ at mail dot gmail dot com> <20140910162853 dot GT13931 at adacore dot com> <20140915102949 dot GC13503 at blade dot nx> <CADPb22QFA7k6OH86ouy2wep1fpFbvBOAdfCd753r_fscMDNZ5g at mail dot gmail dot com> <20140915160545 dot GN4962 at adacore dot com>
On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 9:05 AM, Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com> wrote:
>> There's still something missing (IIUC).
>> One of the problems that needs to be solved is documenting the author
>> in the patch submission (the email that goes to the list). The above
>> convention allows for a default where the absence of a name means
>> author == committer, but we're still not specifying an absolute
>> requirement that the patch author appears in the email sent to the
>> list.
>> Am I missing something?
>
> I am not sure I understand what you are trying to say: You are now
> establishing that there are 3 users, not 2. author, submitter, and
> committer. Why do we need the submitter's name in the revision log?
We don't need the submitter's name in the revision log.
I was referring to the patch author appearing in the email
sent to the list.
Pedro wrote "I think author info must be explicit in patch submissions
somehow."
ref: https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb/2014-09/msg00038.html
Read the full text of 00038 for more context.
I agree.
The changes specified in
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb/2014-09/msg00052.html
do not address this, yet in the text of that email (00052)
Pedro's comment is included (again, ref: 00052).
Therefore ISTM there is still something missing.
We still haven't solved the problem of providing a convention
where the author is explicitly specified in patch submissions.
00052 allows for a default where author == committer.
But on the patch submission side it's not clear to me
we want a default of patch author == patch submitter.
[btw, given that the "convention allows for a default where the absence
of names means author == committer" I'm ok with the proposed
change to the commit log since in general it won't mean more
manual effort.]
I'm just pointing out that, unless I'm missing something,
we still need to document a convention where patch
author is explicitly specified in patch submissions.
If I still haven't made myself clear let me know.
I'm happy to elaborate as necessary.