On Tue, Sep 03, 2013 at 10:06:19AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > On Tue, Sep 03, 2013 at 02:35:35AM -0400, Jeff King wrote: > >> On Sat, Aug 31, 2013 at 10:22:50PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > >> > >> > On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 07:57:47PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > >> > > Consider [anything]-by: a valid signature. > >> > > This includes Tested-by: Acked-by: Reviewed-by: etc. > >> > > > >> > > Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@xxxxxxxxxx> > >> > > >> > Ping. > >> > Any opinion on whether this change is acceptable? > >> > >> I was left confused by your commit message, as it wasn't clear to me > >> what a "signature" is. But the point of it seems to be that people > >> mention others in commit messages using "X-by:" pseudo-headers besides > >> "signed-off-by", and you want to cc them along with the usual S-O-B. > >> > >> That seems like a reasonable goal, but I have two concerns. > >> > >> One, I would think the utility of this would be per-project, depending > >> on what sorts of things people in a particular project put in > >> pseudo-headers. Grepping the kernel history shows that most X-by > >> headers have a person on the right-hand side, though quite often it is > >> not a valid email address (on the other hand, quite a few s-o-b lines in > >> the kernel do not have a valid email). > >> > >> And two, the existing options for enabling/disabling this code all > >> explicitly mention signed-off-by, which becomes awkward. You did not > >> update the documentation in your patch, but I think you would end up > >> having to explain that "--supress-cc=sob" and "--signed-off-by-cc" > >> really mean "all pseudo-header lines ending in -by". > >> > >> So I think it might be a nicer approach to introduce a new "suppress-cc" > >> class that means "all pseudo-header tokens ending in -by" or similar. > >> We might even want the new behavior on by default, but it would at least > >> give the user an escape hatch if their project generates a lot of false > >> positives. > >> > >> -Peff > > > > I guess there's always cccmd, no? > > I am having a hard time deciphering what this response means. Are > you suggesting that people can use cccmd to do what your patch > wants to do, so the patch is not needed? > > I tend to agree with Peff that it is a reasonable goal to allow more > than just the fixed set of trailers to be used as a source to decide > whom to Cc, and if it can be generic enough, it would make sense to > supply users such support so that various projects do not have to > invent their own. > > The question of course is the first point Peff raised. I am not > sure offhand what the right per-project customization interface > would be. A starting point might be something like: > > --cc-trailer=signed-off-by,acked-by,reviewed-by tested-by, reported-by ... > or even > > --cc-trailer='*-by' > > and an obvious configuration variable that gives the default for it. > That would eventually allow us not to special case any fixed set of > trailers like S-o-b like the current code does, which would be a big > plus. What bothers me is that git normally uses gawk based patterns, but send-email is in perl so it has a different syntax for regexp. What do you suggest? Make a small binary to do the matching for us? -- MST -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html