Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes: > On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 03:12:48PM -0500, Murtuza Mukadam wrote: > >> We have linked peer review discussions on >> git@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx to their respective commits within the main >> git.git repository. You can view the linked reviews from 2012 >> until present in the GitHub repo at: >> https://github.com/mmukadam/git/tree/review > > Neat. We've experimented in the past with mapping commits back to > mailing list discussions. Thomas (cc'd) has a script that creates > git-notes trees mapping commits to the relevant message-id, which can > then be found in the list archive. > > To me, the interesting bits of such a project are: > > 1. How do we decide which messages led to which commits? There is > definitely some room for heuristics here, as patches are sometimes > tweaked in transit, or come in multiple stages (e.g., the original > patch, then somebody suggests a fixup on top). You might want to > compare your work with the script from Thomas here: > > http://repo.or.cz/w/trackgit.git Eh, or don't. My script nowadays uses Junio's suggestion of matching on (author, authordate) with a little bit of tweaking in case there is no match. The name/date match works for most cases even in slightly tweaked forms. (The very first version elaborately tried all sorts of things, including attempting to patch on master, next etc. to see where it applies, and turned out to be waaaay too slow.) I'm no longer convinced that there's anything a computer can do beyond (author, authordate), anyway. Perhaps someone with a clue in UIs -- that's definitely not me -- could make a website where users can complete or correct the autogenerated mappings to go further. -- Thomas Rast tr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx -- 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