On 1/9/24 11:45, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > On Tue, 9 Jan 2024 at 10:17, Laszlo Ersek <ler...@redhat.com> wrote: >> >> On 1/5/24 01:05, Rebecca Cran via groups.io wrote: >>> I noticed recent commits by Jeff Brasen, Jake Garver, Joey Vagades and >>> Michael Roth have funky Author lines, which I think means .mailmap needs >>> updated? >>> >>> Author: Jeff Brasen via groups.io <jbrasen=nvidia....@groups.io> >>> Author: Joey Vagedes via groups.io <joeyvagedes=microsoft....@groups.io> >>> Author: Jake Garver via groups.io <jake=nvidia....@groups.io> >>> Author: Roth, Michael via groups.io <Michael.Roth=amd....@groups.io> >> >> I'm sure I'm confusing the terms here, but this is a consequence of >> DMARC / DKIM / whatever, for some senders. groups.io cannot resend some >> kind of messages to list subscribers where the original sender domain >> (such as nvidia.com, microsoft.com, amd.com) is cryptographically >> authenticated. If groups.io resent those messages with identical "from", >> then the recipients (list subscribers) would reject those messages, >> because they'd perceive the messages as fakes (the crypto check would >> catch that the messages came from groups.io but claimed to originate >> from nvidia.com, microsoft.com, amd.com -- that's exactly what DKIM / >> DMARC etc etc are supposed to prevent). Therefore groups.io rewrites the >> sender email addresses like seen above, and then "git-am" picks up those >> rewritten addresses verbatim. That's how they end up in the git commit >> history. >> >> This can be manually fixed by whoever applies such patches from the >> list: after the initial "git-am", a git-rebase is needed, and each patch >> needs to have its author meta-datum fixed with "git commit --amend >> --author='corrected email address'". It's a lot of manual and error >> prone work (unless someone scripts it, effectively "decoding" the >> rewriting format that groups.io employs). As much as it pains me to >> admit it, this is definitely an argument in favor of git forge-based >> contributions, and against mailing list-based patches. >> >> ".mailmap" can be used to mitigate this issue, per gitmailmap(5); it'd >> be better just not to permit such mangled "From:" fields to seep into >> the git log, in the future. :/ >> > > Agreed, and I think this came up somewhere last year perhaps? Mike > Kinney (cc'ed) might remember if that went anywhere, but the idea was > for PatchCheck.py (which is also used in CI) to reject patches using > an email address in this format.
Oh, great idea. When CI runs PatchCheck.py on the final "push" PR, that would definitely catch this issue just in time! > > Note that git am does support a 'From: ' header as the first line of > the commit log, and will use it correctly to supersede the From: > header in the SMTP envelope. OTOH, that doesn't help in this case, IIUC. When the poster originally formats and sends the patch, their gitconfig says user.email=foo...@example.com, and the author meta-datum on the patch most likely *also* says foo...@example.com. (I.e., they are formatting a patch they have authored themselves.) Therefore git-format-patch/git-send-email have no reason to include an explicit "From:" line at the top of the commit message body. I agree that "From:", if present, mitigates the issue, but in most cases, I reckon, it's not present. Laszlo -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#113445): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/113445 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/103534194/21656 Group Owner: devel+ow...@edk2.groups.io Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/leave/9847357/21656/1706620634/xyzzy [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
