Also pretty sure you have to set your apache email as your primary/public if you want it to show in merges.
On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 12:06 PM Phil Sorber <sor...@apache.org> wrote: > Just found this: > > Keep my email address private > > We will use *psudae...@users.noreply.github.com > <psudae...@users.noreply.github.com>* when performing web-based Git > operations and sending email on your behalf. If you want command line Git > operations to use your private email you must set your email in Git > <https://help.github.com/articles/setting-your-email-in-git>. > > On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 11:43 AM Leif Hedstrom <zw...@apache.org> wrote: > >> >> > On Apr 15, 2016, at 11:22 AM, James Peach <jpe...@apache.org> wrote: >> > >> > >> >> On Apr 15, 2016, at 10:09 AM, Leif Hedstrom <zw...@apache.org> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >>> On Apr 15, 2016, at 9:34 AM, Brian Geffon <bri...@apache.org> wrote: >> >>> >> >>> I'm not thrilled with it either. I agree that the email addresses are >> >>> definitely not desireable, also I don't like how it also produces a >> merge >> >>> commit. >> >> >> >> >> >> I can deal with the merge commit, but the email addressing issues are >> not cool. We should come with an agreement on this, such that the workflow >> is well defined. >> > >> > How about a merge/integrate script for PRs, so that committers can >> review and test before pushing to master? It gives me the winkies to merge >> code to master that hasn't run through regression testing ... >> >> >> >> Sure, but what would the script do other than just “git merge” of the PR? >> Fwiw, I fully expect everyone (or at least committers) to have run code >> through both regressions and clang-format before pushing the PR :). >> >> I think for now, as Phil suggested, we should keep merging like we used >> to, manually git merge the PRs etc. and push that way. >> >> Cheers, >> >> - leif >> >>
