Re: Bug: Commit fails when no global email address is set even though --author is used

From: Kristoffer Haugsbakk <code@khaugsbakk.name>
Date: Feb 9, 2024, 11:02 UTC
Message-ID: <5c25da43-c886-41d2-b057-b95a84b107ba@app.fastmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <26317088-7020-43EF-8B60-41D719A6D145@qt.io>

On Fri, Feb 9, 2024, at 09:46, Marcus Tillmanns wrote:

Show 5 quoted lines

> Everything you said is true. But it misses the point.
>
> If I try to commit for the first time, don’t want to set the global
> config, look at man git-commit and search for “author", it says
> “—author” to specify the author.

That reminds me of a mistake I once did. I was setting things up on a different machine and I set `author.*` in my config. Then I got very confused when `git commit` complained. I totally failed to see that I need to set `user.*`, not `author.*`.

Ideally I think I should have gotten this error:

``` Committer identity unknown

The `author` config is set but not `committer`.

Did you mean to set `user` (author and committer)? ```

Show 5 quoted lines

> Since “comitter” is such a hidden feature that even long time users of
> git don’t necessarily know about it, when I then specify “—author” and
> get the “same” error message again, I have no clue what’s going on,
> since I just specified my user name and email, and still I’m told it
> cannot be determined.

This is a very good point. The _committer_ is pretty well-hidden in normal workflows. And probably irrelevant.

So when a user gets this error:

``` Committer identity unknown

*** Please tell me who you are. ```

And have never heard of “committer” before… what is she to think? I think it’s very natural to conclude that “author” and “committer” are the same thing. So she thinks:

  “ Okay, so the program is complaining about the author not being
    set. (It calls it “committer” here for some reason.) But I have set
    the author…

Maybe this is another case of: it all makes perfect sense if you already know all the concepts.

>> Your report would have been more clear if you included the error:
>
> Had I had any idea that the report was different between with / without
> —author I probably would have added it, or found out what the issue was.

You don’t know what you don’t know. That’s why it’s best to include all context.

Cheers

-- 
Kristoffer Haugsbakk