couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Fedor Indutny <fe...@indutny.com>
Subject Re: git commit: Automate maintenance of the THANKS file
Date Mon, 18 Jun 2012 10:29:50 GMT
Speaking of that, can I ask to add me to THANKS file? ;)

Cheers,
Fedor.



On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 12:09 AM, Jan Lehnardt <jan@apache.org> wrote:

>
> On Jun 17, 2012, at 22:05 , Paul Davis wrote:
>
> > On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 3:02 PM, Jan Lehnardt <jan@apache.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Jun 17, 2012, at 21:56 , Paul Davis wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 2:44 PM, Jan Lehnardt <jan@apache.org> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> On Jun 17, 2012, at 21:29 , Paul Davis wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> I'm not sure I like this so much. Playing around with it, its a
bit
> >>>>> prone to screw ups.
> >>>>
> >>>> I just don't want to maintain this file manually any more. It is
> >>>> error-prone and makes merging user-contributions a pain. I'm happy
> >>>> to have this implemented in any other way, but I think we should
> >>>> try to remove any mechanical steps from maintaining our source if
> >>>> we can. I hope you agree! :)
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> Its an extra step but not one that I find to be particularly onerous.
> >>> Given that we're already working on codifying merge practices I don't
> >>> see why we don't just add a check box for "includes commit adding
> >>> yourself to the THANKS file if this is your first contribution" that
> >>> we look for.
> >>
> >> That's a fair point, but this has annoyed me forever.
> >>
> >>>>> It also breaks if AUTHORS.gz exists before you
> >>>>> pull in new commits. We could solve that by forcing it to build
every
> >>>>> time but that's a bit of a hack for not much gain.
> >>>>
> >>>> Can you explain how it breaks if AUTHORS.gz exists before the merge?
> >>>> If you mean THANKS.gz, my idea was that this is only relevant on
> >>>> packaging time (make distcheck) where THANKS.gz by definition does
> >>>> not exist.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> I'm not sure its a good idea to have a file that is only built
> >>> correctly in special circumstances.
> >>
> >> I'm happy to add an rm -f $< to the target.
> >>
> >>
> >>>>> Its also got Benoit in there twice since he made commits with
> slightly
> >>>>> different author/committer names which also seems awkward.
> >>>>
> >>>> The subsequent .mailmap commit fixes the dupes. The push emails seem
> >>>> to be delayed atm, I reported this to danielsh on #asfinfra.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> I'm confused. You've removed one manually curated file only to add a
> >>> new one that just modifies the build of the first? Seems like a lot of
> >>> gymnastics.
> >>
> >> .mailmap solves more than just this.
> >>
> >>
> >>> In a perfect world I would be all in with you on this but
> >>> unfortunately a large number of people don't spend time checking their
> >>> user settings before pushing commits around. Instead of just adding
> >>> people to a file the first time they make a commit this means I have
> >>> to go and check that the THANKS file is generated properly and then
> >>> maybe update .mailmap if not and recheck that I got it correct.
> >>
> >> Fair enough, wanna revert?
> >>
> >> Cheers
> >> Jan
> >> --
> >>
> >>
> >
> > Playing with it a bit to see if I can make it build correctly and also
> > just build the AUTHORS file. I'll leave it around for a bit but won't
> > promise that the first time I spend more than 30s screwing with
> > mailmap that I revert it.
>
> Heh, that took me a while to get right :)
>
> Cheers
> Jan
> --
>
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message