On 7 October 2016 at 22:26, Joseph Myers wrote: > On Fri, 7 Oct 2016, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote: >> FWIW, I thought at one point the consensus was that the mailmap would >> expand only to $use...@gcc.gnu.org rather than $userid@$organization, >> esp. considering the case where there is no single $organization that >> accurately covers the whole contribution timespan of the given $userid. > > I don't think there was any such consensus (older ids weren't from > gcc.gnu.org anyway so @gcc.gnu.org would be nonsense for that part of the > history). > > My view is: contributors are free to specify what name and email address > they want used, but if they want something other than a single name and > email address for the whole commit history with a given username, it's the > contributor's responsibility to come up with lists of commits that use > each mapping rather than a hypothetical recipe based on examining > ChangeLogs.
We'd only need to look at the actual ChangeLogs if the commit message doesn't include a name and email address. And if we just use the committer, how do we record the author of a change? As Richi said a year ago (and my reply was drafted a year ago but not sent) ... On 17 September 2015 at 11:44, Richard Biener wrote: > Maybe I'm missing sth but apart from the CVS imported revisions each > SVN revision should contain the actual change plus the changes to the > ChangeLog files (you can't count on the commit message itself I guess > as not all people replicate the ChangeLog entries there). It's probably a good start though. If the commit message does have: YYYY-MM-DD John Doe <j...@example.com> then it's probably reliable. If the commit message doesn't have that (when I'm committing my own work I don't include that line in the commit message) then look for ChangeLog entries in the commit. > There may be cases we can't handle and then doing some commit ID > mapping might be ok, but I expect 95% of the cases to work out nicely > so we should preserve what is in the ChangeLog entry (note that we have > very strict formatting requirement for the authors there). Particularly since the ChangeLog entry gives the Author, which is often not the same as the Committer. > > [reposurgeon aside from observations with other conversions where > different author maps were needed for different revisions: the revision > range for commits from the gcc2 repository works in the GCC case because > that revision range came from CVS and so there are no tags with valid > commit authors in that range. But if you have a repository with different > ranges of commits having different author maps *and* those ranges contain > SVN tags, simply specifying a range <SVN-commit>..<SVN-commit> doesn't > work as expected, since ranges are interpreted in reposurgeon's ordering > of events, not SVN's ordering, and the tag events are out of sequence with > the commit events.] > > -- > Joseph S. Myers > jos...@codesourcery.com
