From: Felipe Contreras Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2012 22:48:10 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] test: mailmap can change author name without changing email Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20120214215023.GC9651@burratino> On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 11:50 PM, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > Felipe Contreras wrote: >> On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 10:35 PM, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > >>> (2) 'email@example.com' >>> becomes the canonical author email for commits with author name 'A U >>> Thor'. >> >> That's not true. I initially thought that was the case, and I think it >> might be useful to have that, but it's not the case now, and your >> patch doesn't test this. > > Thanks for explaining.  I had indeed confused myself into thinking 'A > U Thor ' would act like 'A U Thor > '. > > I should have said: > > -- 8< -- > A mailmap entry in the format 'A U Thor ' means > that 'A U Thor' should be the canonical author name for commits > with author address 'email@example.com', and the email address > should be left alone. > > We already have tests for this format regarding the committer name, > but not in the author name, so the tests do not cover the shortlog and > blame codepaths as they should.  Fix that. > -- >8 -- At which point the summary doesn't seem to be correct "test: mailmap can change author name without changing email". Plus, I fail to see what would be the usefulness of this test, as changing name is changing the name, regardless if it's the author or the committer. > [...] >>> Signed-off-by: Felipe Contreras >> >> I most definitely did not sign this off, and I didn't add any of these >> lines, nor wrote anything about this commit message. > > That's why I described the changes I made, signed with my initials, > and put my own sign-off below yours.  Did I screw up somewhere? You more or less rewrote the whole thing, I don't think you should put my s-o-b in those cases. Anyway, I have seen people use this format: Signed-off-by: Felipe Contreras [jn: rewrite the patch] Signed-off-by: Jonathan Nieder Even better: Based on a patch by Felipe Contreras. Signed-off-by: Jonathan Nieder > Note that I am making these changes because, at its heart, I think > your patch is good and useful.  Otherwise I would have ignored it and > worked on something else.  If you prefer that I don't make > improvements like this, please indicate why that's a good idea; > otherwise I will probably continue to do it when I see good patches, > despite all the signals you are giving that I have done something > awful by corrupting your perfect patch in this way. I didn't hint I preferred that. You said you wanted to improve my patches, why can't I do the same? -- Felipe Contreras