David Glasser <glasser@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > So to be concrete: What I'm proposing (and I'm excited to implement > it!) is the following: > > When running "git commit" and: > - You've fallen into the case where the message was read from SQUASH_MSG > - You haven't used another method of specifying the author (--author, > -C, -c, --amend) > - You have not specified --reset-author > - You have set the "commit.useSquashAuthor" option > - Before invoking prepare-commit-msg, all of the `Author:` lines found > in SQUASH_MSG have the same value > > then that author is used, as if it were specified with --author. (And > this will show up, commented-out, at the bottom of COMMIT_EDITMSG.) I actually was hoping that this would extend to cases other than "git merge --squash". When running "git commit" and: - You didn't use a more explicit method of specifying the authorship identity (--author, --date, -C, -c --amend, --reset-author options, or environment variables GIT_AUTHOR_*); - You have commit.useAuthorFromEditorComment variable; - You have "# Author: " line that are identical in the result of the editor, then use that author. That would allow "git commit --amend" to update a misspelled author name, for example. Is that a bit too liberal? Would it invite mistakes? -- 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