Re: [PATCH v3] git-merge: rewrite already up to date message

From: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
Date: May 2, 2021, 07:14 UTC
Message-ID: <CAPig+cRm9yE9vpcms4rpPwJxd-C0MQ8n17tiyW8ufXwG=1UaTg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <xmqqr1ipbqif.fsf@gitster.g>

On Sun, May 2, 2021 at 2:26 AM Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:

Show 13 quoted lines

> Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com> writes:
> > I don't have a strong opinion between Co-authored-by: and Helped-by:
> > in this case. Here's my sign-off if you want to retain Co-authored-by:
> >
> >     Signed-off-by: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
>
> I am not in principle opposed to the idea of co-authored-by; for
> this particular one, we historically have used Helped-by (i.e. a
> reviewer offers "writing it this way is cleaner" suggestions on the
> list and then gets credited on the next version), and it wasn't
> clear to me if you consented to be a co-author of the patch.  If the
> party who were named as a co-author responded that it is OK, I would
> be perfectly fine.

It wasn't my intention to be co-author but I'm OK with the designation in this particular case since I did end up authoring all the code in the patch (aside from `void`), even if that authorship was by accident through the circumstance of reviewing the patch (but, as mentioned above, I can go either way with it).