Re: Git Rebase blows away GIT_AUTHOR_NAME
- From
Erik Faye-Lund <kusmabite@gmail.com>
- Date
- Jan 14, 2011, 16:30 UTC
- Message-ID
- <AANLkTimcQq++CLv66AyTve+PiXBhYdUPk2epCyOXX1c0@mail.gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <20110114162144.GA867@sigill.intra.peff.net>
On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 5:21 PM, Jeff King <peff@peff.net> wrote:
Show 31 quoted lines
> On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 05:13:59PM +0100, Erik Faye-Lund wrote: > >> > The three-letter minimum is just a sanity check. If your name really >> > is even just three letters, I suspect you're just lying. I don't know >> > of anybody named "A B". >> > >> Thanks for clarifying that it's not there for a technical reason. The >> thing is, git-am seems to be the only place where such a sanity-check >> is performed. Shouldn't git-commit rather perform such checks also (if >> such a check should be done at all), perhaps with an override similar >> to --allow-empty? And on top of all it doesn't barf, it just silently >> replace the name with the e-mail... > > I tend to agree with Linus on the stupidity issue, but I do worry about > the subtlety of the results. It causes silent data corruption during a > rebase (or when somebody is applying an emailed patch). On the other > hand, I do understand why Linus made a sanity check in the first place; > his use case is to deal with whatever crap people happen to mail him, > whether they have used git or not. > > So we should probably do one or both of: > > 1. Make an --allow-any-name option to mailinfo, and use it when we > invoke mailinfo internally for rebasing. That still doesn't solve > the emailed patch problem, but at least keeps purely internal > operations sane. > > 2. Bump the check up to git-commit time, which is the best place to > catch and tell somebody that their name is too short, because they > can actually fix it. >
The problem with (2) is that git-am uses git-commit-tree rather than git-commit. But I do think that adding the same checks to git-commit would make sense. Unless we decide to remove the checks, that is...