On Wed, 4 Jun 2008, Jakub Narebski wrote: > Karl Hasselström <kha@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > On 2008-06-04 11:16:46 +0200, Jaroslav Kysela wrote: > > > > > On Tue, 3 Jun 2008, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > > > > > > > That feels really funny, given that the guy running git-am _is_ > > > > the committer, not whoever provided some extra headers to the > > > > mailbox. > > > > > > Yes, the implementatation does not make sense for public patch > > > handling, but if you do various things locally with git-rebase or > > > git-am (pack picking from another repo), you may consider it useful. > > > > But still, you're creating new commits, so they should have your name > > on them. > > Yes, if you are _creating_ *commits*, then you are *committer*, isn't it? I agree with that, but if you just manage patches and you want to keep commit history and change only hash numbers, it's an option. Nothing else. It's just tool extension and users have to cleverly decide if it's worth to use it or not. I just used in for my work. Jaroslav ----- Jaroslav Kysela <perex@xxxxxxxx> Linux Kernel Sound Maintainer ALSA Project, Red Hat, Inc.
