On 01/16/20 22:34, Leif Lindholm wrote: > On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 19:54:43 +0100, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote: >>> Phil, would it make sense for us to ask Leif to post an update to >>> ".mailmap"? >>> >>> For example, what happens if we run "git shortlog" over a period that >>> contains patches authored by *both* of Leif's email addresses? Would >>> those entries be merged into a single block? Would such a merging be >>> desirable (that's for Leif to decide / propose)? >> >> One use of .mailmap is to clean/unify the NAME part. >> In this case Leif isn't affected because his NAME is the same. >> >> The other use is to redirect email when a user switch email. When >> fixing/referring old commit, some email tools might take the old commit >> author/committer. In this case .mailmap helps. I think it is desirable in >> Leif particular case. > > The question is *why* we use the mailmap to begin with. > It is not clear to me that there was an understanding at the point > .mailmap was added that the intent was to provide a mapping of people > to current email addresses in perpetuity.
It's one of the possible / nice-to-have goals, for "git shortlog". It's absolutely *not* a requirement -- and I wanted to mention again that such a cross-domain mapping is not something a maintainer can heap on top at a push. Cross-domain generally implies cross-employer, and companies might easily not be OK with that. So it's fully up to the person to propose (post) such a mapping. If they don't, then there's not going to be such a mapping; end of story :) > Indeed, the initial commit message says: > "The .mailmap git feature helps fixing commit mistakes (in name/email)." > > The comment header in the file itself says: > # This list is used by git-shortlog to fix a few botched name translations > # in the git archive, either because the author's full name was messed up > # and/or not always written the same way, making contributions from the > # same person appearing not to be so or badly displayed. > > Now, I'm not saying that providing a way to track individuals across > employments, acquisitions, or other transitions is a bad idea. And > using the .mailmap is a workable way of doing this, since it needs to > be manually invoked outside of shortlog (it could be disastrous if it > didn't, or the default git behaviour changes in the future). I agree: ".mailmap" must not unsolicitedly collapse email addresses. > *But* before we start treating it in this way, I would like to see the > intended use of .mailmap documented (in the tree), and that change > reviewed by at least a couple of stewards and enough others to be able > to say we have a consensus. > > If we do, I have no objections to the below patch being added at that > point - but from my viewpoint, doing it before then would mean an > unreviewed change to the process as some people understood when the > file was first added. I don't think we're actively proposing cross-domain mappings, as part of the process. In my mind it's something everyone is "free to consider". I just thought you might want to consider it. I'm also not against formalizing this option, but I don't feel like actively pursuing it. Thanks! Laszlo -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#53349): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/53349 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/69696909/21656 Group Owner: devel+ow...@edk2.groups.io Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
