public inbox for git@vger.kernel.org 
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox•com>
To: Jeff King <peff@peff•net>
Cc: David Glasser <glasser@davidglasser•net>, git@vger•kernel.org
Subject: Re: Keep original author with git merge --squash?
Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2015 11:30:53 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <xmqq1tltobgy.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150213071041.GA26775@peff.net> (Jeff King's message of "Fri, 13 Feb 2015 02:10:41 -0500")

Jeff King <peff@peff•net> writes:

> On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 03:32:37PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
>> > It also raises a question for the proposal in this thread: if there are
>> > multiple "Author:" lines, which one do we take? The first, or the last?
>> 
>> I was siding with David's "pay attention to in-buffer Author: only
>> when all of them agree".  When squash-merging a branch with two or
>> more authors, we would attribute the authorship silently and
>> automatically to you if you do not do anything special otherwise.
>
> That's probably reasonable. I was thinking more of a case where you made
> some fixups on top of somebody else's branch, and then used "git rebase
> -i" to squash them together. But I think we already use the authorship
> for the root of the squash in that case.
>
> This case collapses nicely if we make a slight tweak to your proposed
> behavior (or maybe this is what you meant). If there are multiple
> authors listed, we behave as if none was listed. That would leave the
> authorship as it behaves today (with the author of the first commit) if
> you do nothing, or you can override it by dropping all but one.

I actually was (and am still) wondering that "silently ignore all of
them if there are multiple ones that contradict with each other" is
a bad idea, and that was why the last item on the "possible
alternatives" list was to error out and ask clarification.

  reply	other threads:[~2015-02-13 19:31 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-02-11 17:21 Keep original author with git merge --squash? David Glasser
2015-02-12  9:28 ` Jeff King
2015-02-12 11:35   ` Michael Haggerty
2015-02-12 12:12     ` Jeff King
2015-02-12 18:42       ` David Glasser
2015-02-12 20:18   ` Junio C Hamano
2015-02-12 20:53     ` David Glasser
2015-02-12 21:23       ` Junio C Hamano
2015-02-12 22:16         ` David Glasser
2015-02-12 22:19           ` David Glasser
2015-02-12 22:34           ` Junio C Hamano
2015-02-12 22:50             ` Jeff King
2015-02-12 23:32               ` Junio C Hamano
2015-02-13  7:10                 ` Jeff King
2015-02-13 19:30                   ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2015-02-13 19:55                     ` Jeff King
2015-02-13  0:17             ` David Glasser
2015-02-13  0:21               ` David Glasser

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=xmqq1tltobgy.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com \
    --to=gitster@pobox$(echo .)com \
    --cc=git@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
    --cc=glasser@davidglasser$(echo .)net \
    --cc=peff@peff$(echo .)net \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox