On Wed, 24 Feb 2021 at 01:25, Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > [...] > We used to have only --fixup that was meant to squeeze in minor > corrections to the contents recorded, and it kept the log message > of the original commit intact. > > Now we have two other ways, --fixup=reword that is meant to correct > only the log message while keeping the contents intact from the > original, and --fixup=amend that is meant to allow users to do both. > They are nice additions to our toolbox. > > While trying to use the --fixup=amend myself to "touch up" somebody > else's work today, another thing that we did not discuss so far came > to my mind (sorry, if this was discussed and resolved in your > previous discussions with other reviewers). What should we do to > the authorship? > Yes, for the authorship similar to `--fixup`, when used with suboptions `amend` or `reword`, it keeps the original authorship. > For the original --fixup, it is reasonably obvious that the original > authorship should be kept, as the intended use case is to make a > small tweak that does not change the intention of the commit in any > way (and that is why the log message from the original is kept), and > with --fixup=reword, it would probably be the same (the contents > were written by the original author alone, and the person fixing-up > is not changing only the log message). So these two have a > reasonably good default model for the authorship information for the > final outcome: the original authorship should be kept (of course, > the user can easily take over the authorship later with "git commit > --amend --reset-author" perhaps run as part of "rebase -i", if the > contribution is significant enough to deserve the transfer of the > authorship). > > But I am not sure what the default behaviour for the authorship when > --fixup=amend:<commit> is used to update somebody else's commit. I > think it is OK to leave it to whatever the code happens to do right > now (simply because I have no strong reason to vote for either way > between keeping the original and letting the amending user take it > over), but I think it should be documented what happens in each > case. > Okay, I agree. We have included in the tests where we check both the resulting commit message and the author details but yes I will document it as well. Thanks and Regards, Charvi
