Jani Averbach <jaa@jaa.iki.fi> writes:
> On 2005-07-15 15:49-0500, kfogel@tigris.org wrote:
> > Author: kfogel
> > Date: Fri Jul 15 15:49:27 2005
> > New Revision: 15346
>
> > Patch by: Gábor Szabó <szabgab@gmail.com>
> > Tweaked by: me
>
> Might make sense to use your actual account name for the tweked by:,
> this way it should be much more easier to parse and tally.
Keep the real goal in mind: we're trying to track contributions from
potential new developers. We're not parsing for parsing's sake :-).
The people who tweak patches are almost always already committers. (I
know this because I just looked at all revisions that applied a patch
from someone else.) We don't need to parse the committer's name out.
In fact, I should have written
Patch by: Gábor Szabó <szabgab@gmail.com>
(Tweaked by me.)
...so it wouldn't even look like I was trying to be parseable. That's
what I did in the 981 log messages I just edited for
http://www.red-bean.com/kfogel/changed-revs.utf8 :-).
IMHO we want to use "me" as a convention for "the author of this
revision". I don't think it's reasonable to ask committers to write
out their entire name (let alone name and email address) when they
apply a patch. We know who it was, since the name is on the commit.
If we ever *really* need to extract that information, it's still quite
easy to parse it out by mapping "me" to the author of the revision.
So no, let's not make people do this work prematurely.
-Karl
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Sat Jul 16 07:57:04 2005