On Thu, 5 Jun 2008, Johannes Sixt wrote:
> Johannes Schindelin schrieb:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Thu, 5 Jun 2008, Stephan Beyer wrote:
> >
> >>> - as has been pointed out several times now, you _are_ the committer,
> >>> and you seem to want to lie there.
> >> Lying is already possible with GIT_COMMITTER_{NAME,EMAIL,NAME}
> >> environment variables.
> >
> > Of course it is possible! I even pointed to a method!
> >
> > The _point_ was that we do not want to recommend it. And giving prominent
> > support for it, such as introducing a command line parameter, _would_
> > have the effect of recommending it.
>
> Furthermore, if you mess with committer dates, you can screw up revision
> walking to some degree. committer dates aren't merely informational.
Of course, you can find many reasons to not use this function. I just used
the proposed function when we migrated from HG to GIT to rebase with
actual Linus's tree without touching commiters (because I've not changed
patches itself).
Also, having a possibility to easy remove a changeset (hardly - not
revert) without touching all other changesets on top is a function worth
to include. With --committer parameter, it can be easily implemented using
git-format-patch & git-am. And before you complain, yes, I know - it
should be used only localy before the repository is published to others.
** I take GIT as a tool to manage repositories and it has already many
low-level commands/parameters. My proposal was an extension to them. If
there are not real technical reasons agains, it should go in. Users have
to decide about useability for their cases. I saw only "political"
comments that it's evil to do so in some (most of) cases. End of my
opinion. **
Jaroslav
-----
Jaroslav Kysela <perex@xxxxxxxx>
Linux Kernel Sound Maintainer
ALSA Project, Red Hat, Inc.
--
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
