Re: [PATCH] format-patch --signoff
- From
Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
- Date
- May 31, 2006, 23:31 UTC
- Message-ID
- <Pine.LNX.4.63.0606010131010.4002@wbgn013.biozentrum.uni-wuerzburg.de>
- In-Reply-To
- <7vlkshyedf.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>
Hi,
On Wed, 31 May 2006, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Show 33 quoted lines
> Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> writes:
>
> > I don't know, but it may be a good idea to make this more general: Why not
> > build the sign-off line here, so that you could also add more than one
> > sign-off lines ('--signoff="The great committer <ter@mit.com>"'), and
> > maybe even Acked-by's?
>
> Perhaps.
>
> > Okay, this would be a little harder with multiple sign-offs. But the check
> > could be easier, i.e. if we say
> >
> > rev.add_signoff = xmalloc(enough_room);
> > strcpy(rev.add_signoff, "\nSigned-off-by: ");
> > strcat(rev.add_signoff, committer_ident);
> > strcat(rev.add_signoff, "\n");
> >
> > then a simple
> >
> > p = strstr(commit_buffer, rev.add_signoff);
> > if (p)
> > return (int)(p - commit_buffer);
> >
> > would do the trick.
>
> Do you mean, by "multiple sign-offs", something like this?
>
> for (so_list = rev.add_signoff; so_list; so_list = so_list->next) {
> if (strstr(commit_buffer, so_list->item))
> continue;
> append_to_commit_buffer(so_list->item);
> }
> return tail - commit_buffer;Actually, I did not think of a linked list, but one buffer, but I like your solution better.
> > And shouldn't we error out if there is not enough room for a sign-off? > > I do not think we error out if the commit message is too long > either, so...
... so you could say that should be an error, too.
Ciao, Dscho