"Kristoffer Haugsbakk" <code@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> On Fri, Feb 9, 2024, at 18:30, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> So, now, let's be productive. When somebody who does not know much
>> about Git tries to commit without configuring anything and hits the
>> error, what is a more appropriate message to guide who does not know
>> what he or she does not know?
>>
>> The user claims that "committer identity unknown, please tell me who
>> you are" were not helpful enough. Would it make it more helpful if
>> we append how to "tell who they are" after that message, perhaps
>> with "git config" on user.email and user.name variables, or
>> something?
>>
>> Or do we need three-way switch that does
>>
>> if (neither is known) {
>> printf("neither author or committer is known");
>> } else if (author is known but committer is not known) {
>> printf("author is known but committer is not"):
>> } else if (author is not known but committer is known) {
>> printf("committer is known but author is not"):
>> } else {
>> return happy;
>> }
>>
>> printf("please tell us who you are...");
>>
>> perhaps?
>
> I think a three-way switch looks good. With the amendment that it steers
> you towards `user.*` instead of setting both `author.*` and
> `committer.*`.
>
> Something like
>
> • Author is set, not committer
> • Message: author is set but not committer: you might want to set
> *user* instead (prints suggested config)
>
> I can try to make a patch later.
Wait. I didn't realize this when I wrote the message you are
responding to, but we *do* already suggest settig user.* variables.
If the user chose to ignore that, then there isn't much we can do to
help, is there?
Puzzled, but I'll stop here.
