On Thu, Oct 10, 2019 at 01:49:03PM +0200, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > Hi, > > On Wed, 9 Oct 2019, Jeff King wrote: > > > On Wed, Oct 09, 2019 at 11:19:47AM +0900, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > > > > > I wonder how we are supposed to use this trailer in the Git project, > > > > in particular in combination with Signed-off-by. Should all > > > > (co)authors sign off as well? Or will Co-authored-by imply > > > > Signed-off-by? > > > > > > I think we have been happy with (1) a comment at the end of the log > > > message that says X worked together with Y and Z to produce this > > > patch, and (2) the trailer block that has S-o-b: from X, Y and Z, > > > without any need for Co-authored-by: trailer so far, and I do not > > > see any reason to change it in this project. > > > > One advantage to making a machine-readable version is that tools on the > > reading side can then count contributions, etc. For instance: > > > > https://github.com/git/git/commit/69f272b922df153c86db520bf9b6018a9808c2a6 > > > > shows all of the co-author avatars, and you can click through to their > > pages. Yep, this is the reason why I raised the suggestion[1] in the first place. Since special support for this trailer is implemented in GitHub (and GitLab too, as I recently learned), I think this could be considered a defacto standard for co-authored commits. > > FWIW I really like this. It bugged me ever since that GitMerge talk > (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=usQgAy8YDVA) that we did not have any > standardized way to document co-authored commits. Yep, and this isn't the first time this has been brought up. I remember stumbling on this thread[2] a while back about someone asking for co-author functionality by default so it would be nice to have a standard way of doing it. Thanks, Denton [1]: https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git/issues/343 [2]: https://public-inbox.org/git/CAOvwQ4i_HL7XGnxZrVu3oSnsbnTyxbg8Vh6vzi4c1isSrrexYQ@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ > > > > If other projects wants to use such a footer, that's their choice, > > > but I am fairly negative to the idea to open the gate to unbounded > > > number of new options for new trailer lines. We do not even have > > > such options like --acked=<acker>, --reported=<reporter>, for the > > > trailers that are actively used already (and to make sure nobody > > > misunderstands, I do not think it is a good idea to add such > > > individual options). > > > > Yeah, I'd agree that we should start first with a generic trailer line. > > There might be some advantage to building trailer-specific intelligence > > on top of that (for instance, it would be nice for coauthor trailers to > > expand names the way --author does). But that can come after, and might > > not even be in the form of specific command-line options. E.g., if the > > coauthor trailer could be marked in config as "this is an ident", then > > we we would know to expand it. And the same could apply to acked, > > reported, etc. > > Yep, and we have to start somewhere. I think this patch is a good start. > > FWIW I would not even mind introducing the synonym `--co-author` for > `--coauthor`. But that's just a very minor suggestion. > > Ciao, > Dscho
